Skip to main content

Full text of "The Builder Magazine - The Complete Collection"

See other formats

The Builder Magazine 

June 1923 - Volume IX - Number 6 



WHAT I THINK ABOUT THE SHRINE - By Bro. James S. McCandless, Imperial 
Potentate A.A.O.N.M.S. for N.A., Hawaiian Islands 



Street, Alabama 

BEN FRANKLIN, PATRON OF MANY ARTS - By Bro. James Murray, New York 

Meekren, Canada 

ASPIRATION - Poem By Bro. C. Gordon Lawrence, Canada 

SCHLEY - By Bro. Geo. W. Baird, P.G.M., District of Columbia 

THE STUDY CLUB - Chapters of Masonic History - Part IV, Freemasonry and the 
Roman Collegia By Bro. H.L. Haywood 

EDITORIAL - The Shrine and Its Problems 

"The Charm of Fine Manners" 

THE LIBRARY - The Infancy and Youth of Scientific Thought 

A Jewish Rabbi's Interpretation of the Three Degrees 

The Part Played by Jews in the History of American Masonry 

THE QUESTION BOX - The Greek Orthodox Church and Freemasonry 
Does Kentucky Have Uniform Work ? 

Mozart As a Mason 

Sir Robert Baden-Powell Not a Mason 

CORRESPONDENCE - Masonic Bodies Named for Dr. Kane 

Six Brothers Raised in One Evening 

Professor Kirsopp Lake Writes About Mithraism 

Wise Words About Masonic Architecture 

Wanted: Information About Comer Stones 

Masonic Lodges of the Cherokee Nation 

Freemasonry in Mexico 

Tuberculosis Sanatorium Commission Asks for Suggestions 


All Articles in this Magazine Copyright 1923 by the National Masonic Research 

What I Think About the Shrine 

By Bro. JAMES S. McCANDLESS, Imperial Potentate A.A.O.N.M.S. for N.A., 
Hawaiian Islands 

AS I HAVE GONE ABOUT over the country, I have been asked here and there by 
prominent and responsible brethren what is my opinion about solicitation for 
membership in the Shrine. Some of these brethren appear to feel that it would be 
better if the Imperial Council were to prohibit solicitation in all forms. My answer 
invariably is that I am not opposed to the kind of solicitation we permit among 

You know that a Mason is not permitted to solicit members for the Blue Lodge. I 
sometimes wonder if it would not be better if we did permit this. A young man who 
joins our Fraternity and who takes the various degrees and becomes experienced in all 
the various Masonic bodies and has worked in close contact with Masons - so many 
of whom are the cream of our American manhood - cannot help but become a better 
young man than he would be otherwise. 

Some of my brother Masons are of the opinion that a certain length of time should 
elapse between a man's becoming a member of the Knights Templar or the Scottish 
Rite and his admittance into the Shrine. I do not see any point to that argument 
whatsoever. What is the difference to anybody whether a man comes in inside of a 
month or inside of a few days if he is made of the right material to begin with, if he 
has the right mind and comes with the right motive? If the Shrine happens to be the 
most companionable and most pleasant place for a young man, he will go there. It 
seems to me that if there is to be any friendly rivalry at all among Masonic bodies or 
between them and the Shrine, that instead of finding fault with Shriners for having 

attractive meetings, these other bodies ought to try to make their meetings more 
attractive. Make it worth while for a man to attend a Blue Lodge or a Chapter or a 
Council and he will attend! 

One of the reasons that I am proud of the Shrine is that it calls the attention of some 
of our young Americans to, Masonry and often, perhaps, induces them to seek 
admittance to our Order. I say that I am glad of this because I think it is a good thing 
and I am happy if the Shrine is an inducement to any young man to become a Mason. 

The Shrine is not in any sense a detriment to Freemasonry; in my judgment it is one 
of the greatest things which has ever happened to Freemasonry, and I know from my 
own personal experience and observation that the great majority of Shriners are the 
very highest type of our American manhood. How could this be otherwise? For 
consider! No young man can come to us until he has become a member of the Blue 
Lodge and also of either the Scottish Rite or the York Rite Bodies. He has been 
ballotted on in every one of these organizations and in none of them has he been 
found wanting. He comes to us with a clean record; therefore, if there is anything 
wrong with a Shriner, it should have been found out long before he reached our gates. 

We are not doing anything in any way to hurt Freemasonry. When the Shrine was 
started some fifty years or so ago there was some doubt in the minds of Masons then 
whether or not the formation of such an organization would prove a detriment or 
discredit to the Fraternity. The Shrine was gotten up by a mere handful of men - there 
were thirteen of them, as I recall it - in the city of New York, for the purpose of 
getting together and having a dinner where good fellows might hold sway; that was 
the sole intention of it when founded and it was something with which nobody could 
quarrel. Now, this little movement - it was little then - got such a hold on the men 
who enjoyed its privileges that they finally established a national organization with a 
very beautiful ritual and this gradually grew into the present great A.A.O.N.M.S. with 
its Imperial Council, and its almost half a million members. 

The Shrine has a creed of its own - Justice, Good Fellowship, Charity, Love of 
Country, and, that which is an attribute of the Holy One Himself, Love of One's 
Neighbor. These beautiful ideals comprise the teachings of the Shrine. 

We have a ceremonial which lends itself to play. Anyone who belongs to the Shrine 
and can't be a boy and have a little of God's sunshine in his soul and a lot of clean, 
healthy gladness in his heart has no business belonging with us, because the Shrine is 
the playground of Masons - you will note I say playground OF Masons, not FOR 


Of course, we have a few men with us who cut up pranks and do foolish things and 
every other organization has such members in it - the Blue Lodge, the Commandery, 
the Scottish Rite - but that is neither here nor there. Every man cannot be a top- 
notcher but if anybody supposes that the Shrine permits a lot of unMasonic conduct 
on the part of Masons or lets all of its members do just as they please, he is badly 
mistaken. In an Order as large as ours, you are sure to find a few men who, out of 
thoughtlessness or folly, become guilty of actions of which the rest of us are ashamed 
but I do not believe the entire organization should be held responsible for what a few 
of its members do. Every time you have a great meeting of men where thousands are 
present and all of them are away from home, you are going to have some things 
happen which you do not like but I do not see how these things can be avoided. 

We in the Shrine are determined to keep our house in order as perfectly as we can. 
We have a committee on law and order which functions at all of our national 
meetings and it is there for the sole purpose of looking after just such cases as 
described above and to see that nothing goes on which will bring discredit upon us or 
upon the Masonic Orders from which we emanate. This committee has been in force 
for two years now and will be on duty in Washington, D.C., when we meet next 
June. Brother A.L. Cameron of Memphis, Tenn., is chairman. I wish to pay a tribute 
to the efficient manner in which that committee took care of things in San Francisco. 
Out there in that great city on the coast, there was no rowdyism, no misconduct, not 

one case in which a man was brought before the committee for censure or expulsion. 
At Washington, D.C., this committee will have its own provost guard and it will work 
in conjunction with the regular authorities of that city. The city authorities and the 
Shrine authorities together will not permit any rough doings on the streets and will 
immediately stop anything bordering on vulgarity or indecency. The Washington 
meeting of the Shrine is to be the greatest in our history, 1 believe, and I am 
confidently expecting that we shall all be proud of the manner in which the great 
crowds will be cared for. 

To me one of the most beautiful things in all of these meetings, in fact in all our 
Shrine meetings, is that we are a common meeting ground for all the various Masonic 
Rites; the Scottish Rite Mason, the York Rite Mason and the Blue Lodge Mason 
fraternize and learn to be good fellows together in our Temples and meetings. There 
are no jealousies or bickerings or contentions amongst us and the sole purpose is that 
we may together enjoy good fellowship in that manner which has been famous among 
Masons ever since Masonry began to be. 

In my own estimation, the greatest work that the Shrine is now undertaking is the 
building of our hospitals for poor crippled children. It seems to me that this is the 
greatest charity which has ever been undertaken by any fraternal organization in the 
entire world. In my heart I know it is the culmination and proof of that which every 
Blue Lodge Mason is taught - namely, Charity to all. All the way through the 
different degrees of Masonry from that of Entered Apprentice to that of Knight 
Templar or Master of the Royal Secret, every Mason is saturated with this great 
passion of brotherly love and relief. When Brother W. Freeland Kendrick, who was 
Imperial Potentate 1919-1920, brought his proposition for this great work before us, 
we were in a proper mood to receive it because we had the spirit of charity in our 


Brother Kendrick's great dream is now being realized. Our hospitals are functioning 
and that successfully under the direction of a Board of Trustees and this Board has 

five orthopedic specialists as an Advisory Board. These brethren, with the help of all 
the rest of us, have already authorized ten of these hospitals of mercy; five of them 
are now under construction and three of them will have been dedicated before these 
words are in print - one in the Twin Cities on April 14th, one in Shreveport, La., on 
April 20th and the one in San Francisco in May when I am there. 

We are now working in our third year on these hospitals and through assessment of 
the members of the Nobility, we have an annual fund of over one million dollars to, 
carry on the project. When these ten hospitals are all finished and in working order 
they will be a credit not only to the Mystic Shrine but to Freemasonry the world over; 
and that fact will make us glad because we are MASONS first - then SHRINERS. 

One of the most interesting developments in our crippled children's hospital project 
that I know of is the manner in which we are going to handle our hospital service in 
Honolulu. When I was elected Imperial Potentate at San Francisco, I got up an 
excursion to Honolulu. We had about one thousand of the Nobility on board, 
including all the Imperial Officers except two. We also had three members of our 
Board of Trustees of the Crippled Children's Hospitals. Some of us Honolulu 
Shriners had been troubled to know how we might do our share in caring for our 
crippled children in the Hawaiian Islands. Since each of our hospitals costs us from 
$250,000.00 to $300,00000, it was out of the question for us to build a hospital 
there. Also it was impossible for us to try to transport our crippled children to San 
Francisco because that would be too expensive as in many cases the family or part of 
it would have to accompany the patient. So we worked out the plan of having a 
Mobile Unit of surgeons come to Honolulu for a time. This suggestion was made to 
the Board of Trustees and they arranged for it. Dr. Hatt with a staff of five will be in 
Honolulu for a period of one year. At every operation, he will invite in the Hawaiian 
Doctors to assist him (most of our Honolulu physicians are Shriners) and at the end of 
the year, these local physicians will be able to carry on that work in conjunction with 
our own local hospital facilities. This unit can function also in Nevada, Arizona and 
in the great Northwest. 

One of my dreams is that the Knights Templar or the Scottish Rite Bodies or perhaps 
both together may follow our lead and erect homes possibly in conjunction with our 
hospitals because oftentimes when we have cured the poor little cripples who come to 

us we find they have no place in which to live. These children should have a home 
and they should be educated and taught how to grow up and become useful citizens in 
the world. These children have to be taken care of by somebody and nobody realizes 
how many of them there are in the country. Just think of it, my brethren! according to 
the records on file with us there are now more than 486,000 of these boys and girls in 
the United States alone who need the kind of treatment we are going to give to a few 
of them in our hospitals! The only limit we set is that these children must not be over 
fourteen years of age. We shall not refuse, however, to take care of any regardless of 
age if we can accommodate them. When they come to us we pay all expenses, and 
treatment and care in these hospitals is absolutely free. 

I like this idea of extending charity to these poor little crippled tots regardless of race, 
creed or nationality, or whether they belong to Masonic families. When I pass into 
the Great Beyond St. Peter will not ask me whether I gave my charity to the children 
of Shriners or to this church or to that or organization; he will ask me how much 
charity I gave, regardless. 


I have been asked many times what we are doing about the so-called Negro "Shrine." 
We are working on that problem but I do not believe it is now possible to say 
anything very definite about it. The main point is that we are jealous of our name 
"Mystic Shrine." We have no quarrel with any other organization at all but we want to 
make sure that in North America nobody can make use of our name "Ancient Arabic 
Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine," except ourselves. We also are trying to protect 
our emblems and insignia and these we have had copyrighted in almost all the states. 

I am sorry to say that we cannot copyright the fez because that is a headdress which 
any man may wear if he wishes. However, we carry a design on the fez, the famous 
crescent, as our own emblem and we are getting that copyrighted in every state. Also, 
we are trying to get dealers not to sell fezzes to anyone but Shriners who have their 
cards; in fact, we are going still further than that - we are trying to get dealers to sell 
these shrine fezzes to Temples only. The dealers helped us in San Francisco to protect 
our fezzes and emblems and we trust that the dealers in Washington, D.C., will do the 

Some brethren here and there have asked me if I have considered it wise for Shrine 
Temples to hold circuses. Now, I am in favor of having a good time but 1 do not want 
to see anything that looks like gambling going on or anything of that sort. If we can 
have circuses which ladies can attend, I am in favor of them, just as I am in favor of 
anything which makes for clean laughter and a good time. 

Shriners wear conspicuous costumes and oftentimes they put on parades that attract a 
good deal of attention. These things often cause rumors to get started which have no 
foundation at all. One of the most notorious instances of these utterly groundless 
rumors is the story that a year ago somebody was going to charter a steamship and go 
across the Pacific Ocean in order to have one long spree. There was nothing to this 
story whatsoever. The Nobility would not go on such a boat. 

Let the sun shine for us all! Let there be gladness! Let all men enjoy life while it is 
given to them to live! Pass happiness around! Work so as to add to the joy of the 
world and to the welfare of man! These are things I believe in. They are things for 
which the Shrine stands. 

— o — 

Oregon and the Little Red Schoolhouse 


(All publication rights in whole or in part strictly reserved.) 

The author of this important contribution was recommended to us by Brother P. S. 
Malcolm, 33d, Inspector-General in Oregon, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, and 
it was he who suggested that the article appear over a nom de plume. The author is a 
prominent professional man whose position has made it possible for him to follow in 
detail and at first hand all the developments of the notable struggle to put on the 
Oregon statute books the now famous Public School Law. Brother Malcolm, who has 
also (as one will learn from the article) actively participated in the campaign and as a 
responsible leader, has read and approved the account published herewith, which may 
be accepted as an accurate history of a movement about which there has been a deal 
of discussion and controversy. All correspondence intended for the author may be 
addressed to THE BUILDER. "An Oregon Mason" refers to a group of Blue Lodge 
Masons who opposed the Bill. It would be interesting to learn from them their ground 
of opposition. Can't one of them furnish us with the contra side of the argument? 

IN A DISPATCH recently carried from New York on the wires of a news-gathering 
association which serves newspapers in every state of the Union, reference was made 
to Oregon's new "anti-parochial school law." It was but one - though rather a notable 
one - of a multitude of instances of misrepresentation, through misunderstanding, of 
the compulsory public school attendance bill passed by the voters of Oregon at the 
election of November 8, 1922. 

Oregon has no "anti-parochial school law," nor any school law whose object or 
purpose is "anti" anything. It has a law whose plain, affirmative, certain purpose is to 
require attendance by all children of grammar school age in the public schools of the 

This purpose is completely set forth in the language of the act itself. Its inspiration 
and the impelling motive of its original proponents are most clearly summarized in 
one of a series of advertisements published during the campaign for the bill by Hon 
P. S. Malcolm, 33d, Inspector-General in Oregon, Ancient and Accepted Scottish 
Rite. He said: 

"The Scottish Rite Masonic bodies are promoting this measure because their members 
believe that the hope of America is in its public schools; that if American institutions 
are to endure, American children of grammar school age must be taught common 
ideals - AMERICAN; that they must be taught in a common language - ENGLISH; 
that they must be taught to foster and uphold one set of principles - those of our 
American forefathers. They believe that the future of our race, our nation and our 
institutions will be perpetuated if ALL our children are so taught, and not otherwise." 

There is nothing in this law which need in the least abridge the right of the parent to 
give the child whatever kind of religious instruction seems to him best. The law was 
conceived as a patriotic measure, as is plainly indicated by the Scottish Rite 
declaration quoted in the foregoing. Its proponents raised no issue of religion nor 
sought to raise any. An issue of religion was raised in the campaign, but not by them, 
as will be explained herein. And the great mass of voters undeniably voted for the law 
as a measure of patriotism. 

Lrom its inception up to the present the new law has been more misrepresented and 
therefore more misunderstood in the nation at large than any other measure ever 
enacted in the state of Oregon. The attempt to defeat the bill by misrepresenting its 
purpose and its sponsorship failed, but its enemies are still active. They have 
announced that they will attack the law in the courts. They are raising an enormous 
fund to finance their effort. They have announced that if they are defeated in the court 
of first resort they will carry their appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. 
And one of their principal propagandists has advised his auditors at a public meeting, 
by undeniable implication, to resist the law forcibly, declaring that "they can't build 
jails big enough and often enough to hold you men." 


Now this article is being written for Masons. To Masons there is a simple, wholly 
sufficient and final answer in refutation of the charge that the Oregon public school 
compulsory attendance law is a measure of religious repression. This answer is that 
the law was conceived by Masons, drafted by Masons and placed on the ballot 

through the efforts of Masons. Every Mason knows that the Masonic Order stands 
ever for the fullest expression of religious freedom under the fatherhood of God; that 
Masonry knows neither religious creed nor religious cult, either to espouse or to 
oppose; that back through the ages the voice of Masonry has ever been raised alike 
against religious oppression and religious repression, and for the freedom of every 
man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and finally that 
"we never proselyte." 

The inspiration for the Oregon public school compulsory attendance bill came from 
the Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite for the Southern 
Jurisdiction of the United States, which on May 20, 1920, committed itself 
unreservedly to the principle of the universal education of children in the public 
schools, by adoption of the following resolution: 

"Resolved, that we recognize and proclaim our belief in the free and compulsory 
education of the children of our nation in public primary schools supported by public 
taxation, upon which all children shall attend and be instructed in the English 
language only, without regard to race or creed, as the only sure foundation for the 
perpetuation and preservation of our free institutions, guaranteed by the Constitution 
of the United States, and we pledge the efforts of the membership of this Order to 
promote by all lawful means the organization, extension and development to the 
highest degree of such schools, and to oppose the efforts of any and all who seek to 
limit, curtail, hinder or destroy the public school system of our land." 

A month after the adoption of this resolution by the Scottish Rite Supreme Council, it 
was endorsed in principle, though not in text and form, by the Grand Lodge of 
Oregon, Ancient Free and Accepted Masons. Also in June of 1920 the Imperial 
Council, Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, in session in Portland, 
endorsed the resolution. Thus by the end of June, 1920, three important major 
organizations in Masonry had, from an Oregon standpoint, placed themselves on 
record for and as upholding the public schools. 

The first definite movement to translate this plain Masonic declaration of principle 
and purpose into action was taken upon the occasion of a visit to Portland, early in 
1922, by Hon. J. H. Cowles, 33d, Grand Commander for the Southern Jurisdiction of 
the Scottish Rite. Commander Cowles held a conference while here with Inspector- 
General Malcolm and other prominent Scottish Rite men, and the subject of the 
compulsory public school attendance resolution came up. Based upon information 
given him, Commander Cowles expressed the opinion, which was concurred in by the 
others present, that conditions in this state appeared favorable for initiatory effort 
towards the enactment of a law to execute here the purpose of the resolution. The 
general body of Blue Lodge Masons was on record through their Grand Lodge 
resolutions as being in sympathy with the public school movement; Oregon was 
known as a progressive state in matters of legislation, and the initiative and 
referendum system of elections in its fullest development was available here. Certain 
aggressions on the part of Roman Catholics which affected some of the public 
schools, and which will be particularized later in this article, had started people 
generally to thinking about the public school question. Recent developments in 
naturalization and other courts which had revealed some rather flagrant cases of 
nonassimilation of foreign bom persons who had grown up here but had not attended 
the public schools, or had attended them but little, had similarly affected the public 
thought in regard to the schools. Altogether public sentiment, it was considered, was 
ripe for the effort and it was decided at this conference to proceed. 


The conference assigned to the Knights Commander of the Court of Honor of the 
Scottish Rite in Oregon the work of placing under way an initiative campaign for a 
suitable bill which would carry out the purpose of the movement. Robert E. Smith, of 
Portland, headed this committee and organized the preliminary work. 

To Judge John B. Cleland, eminent as a jurist, a citizen and a Mason, (he is a Past 
Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Oregon) was delegated the task of drafting the 
bill. His very authorship constituted a guarantee satisfactory to many people of the 
legal soundness of the measure, so that when the cry of unconstitutionality was raised 
by its opponents - which happened very early in the ensuing campaign - its supporters 
declined to register dismay or even serious misgiving. In the view of its friends the 

bill was sound and the law is sound. Those who opposed the bill on the ground of 
alleged unconstitutionality and who are now declaring that the courts will set the law 
aside were its opponents then and are its enemies now. 

Stripped of legal verbiage and collateral clauses, this is what the law provides: 

"Any parent, guardian or other person in the state of Oregon, having control or charge 
or custody of a child under the age of sixteen years and of the age of eight years or 
over, at the commencement of a term of public school in the district in which said 
child resides, who shall fail or neglect or refuse to send such child to a public school 
for a period of time a public school shall be held during the current year in said 
district, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and each day's failure to send such child to 
a public school shall constitute a separate offense and . . . (the offender) shall, on 
conviction thereof be subject to a fine of not less than $5 or more than $100 or to 
imprisonment in the county jail not less than two nor more than 30 days, or by 

Exceptions are provided for children unable to attend school because of physical 
disability, for children who have completed the eighth grade, for children living at a 
distance from a school and for children who are being taught by parent or special 
instructor and who can satisfy the county school superintendent that such instruction 
is standard and sufficient. Under another provision the act is to become effective 
September 1, 1926. 

Thus, it will be noted, the measure, in addition to being carefully drawn was also 
considerately drawn. There is provision for exemption from its terms of all children 
on whom it would work hardship. There is provision for deferred effectiveness in 
order to allow private and denominational schools time in which to readjust their 
affairs. There is the definite single purpose, bluntly stated, that all children shall be 
required to attend the public schools. So far as is consistent with this definite object 
the law is drawn in liberal terms. 


Into the work of the initiative campaign now came many prominent men of Oregon; 
men known not only for their work in Masonry but also for their standing and 
accomplishments in the judicial, official, civic and business life of the state. They 
came with enthusiasm and unity of purpose. They wanted to see Oregon become the 
first state to stand out openly for the universal Little Red Schoolhouse. They knew 
that the fight they were inaugurating would bring down criticism upon them but they 
did not falter. They possessed the courage of their convictions. 

Prominent among those who engaged in the work of preparing and circulating the 
petitions for the initiative was Ira B. Sturges, of Baker. His name headed the formal 
list of initiators printed upon the petitions. Others were: Dr. Robert C. Ellsworth, 
Pendleton; Harold Baldwin, Prineville; W. B. Daggett, Redmond; Lewis H. Irving, 
Madras; Collin E. Davis, The Dalles; Leslie G. Johnson, Marshfield; C. A. Swope, 
Grant's Pass; W. F. Harris, Roseburg; John R. Penland, Albany; J. R. Jeffery, Seaside; 
F. C. Holibaugh, St. Helens; O. O. Hodson, McMinnville and E. L. Johnson, 
Hillsboro. All of them are Scottish Rite Masons. All of them are prominent in the life 
of Oregon. The personnel of the sponsorship was in itself a guarantee of the sincerity 
of the cause. 

Within twenty- four hours after the circulation of the initiative petitions had begun 
simultaneously in every district of Oregon, more than the 28,000 names required to 
assure the measure a place on the ballot had been obtained. A check of the signatures 
made in the office of the Secretary of State at Salem showed some 35,000 valid 
signatures. The spontaneity o f the response surprised even the friends of the bill and 
left its opponents gasping. Friends and foes alike of the measure realized that such a 
response could mean only one thing - that there was a demand for the proposed 
legislation sufficient to make the movement formidable. 

The campaign, directed by Inspector-General Malcolm and carried out through an 
organization known as the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite School Committee, 
headed by George B. Cellars, a Knight Commander of the Court of Honor, was 

affirmative, able and forceful. It was confined strictly to the issue presented in the bill 
- that of the necessity for enacting a law which would insure the education on 
standard lines and on common ground in the public schools of all children of 
grammar school age. There were no attacks on parochial schools or other 
denominational or private schools in the arguments put forth. There was nothing 
defensive in anything offered by the committee, which maintained the high ground 
throughout that the bill, being a thoroughly meritorious one' needed no defense. In 
newspaper advertisements, in circulars and by word of mouth the campaigners put 
forth everywhere the message of Inspector-General Malcolm which has already been 
quoted in the foregoing, with elaborations and correlative facts and arguments in 
support of the bill. Never was the religious issue raised by the Scottish Rite during the 
campaign. Mr. Malcolm steadfastly ignored efforts which were made to involve him 
in religious controversy. 


But organizations outside t he Scottish Rite which flocked to the support of the bill 
after it had been launched did campaign the religious issue. One of the things done by 
some of these was to set before the public generally the facts already referred to in 
this article, regarding certain Roman Catholic activities affecting the public schools. 

It was m ad e known that in five public school districts of Oregon every teacher was a 
Catholic nun. These districts were, like all public school districts, supported by 
general taxation of all their property owners. But majorities of the residents of these 
districts were heavily Catholic. These Catholic majorities elected Catholic boards of 
directors and they in turn hired the nuns as teachers. Protestants who objected had no 
recourse. They must, under the law, send their children to school, and the only 
schools available were those taught by nuns. 

In some districts this condition had existed for a number of years, and in others it was 
of recent origin. A photograph was widely circulated and published in circulars and 
advertisements showing the pupil-body of a school in Washington county grouped in 
front of their school building, with two Catholic sisters, their teachers, among them. 
Circulation of this photograph had a decided effect. 

Here, so far as the public school compulsory attendance bill was concerned, was an 
issue wholly extraneous because the condition exposed would not be affected either 
by the passage or the defeat of the measure. Yet the campaign on this feature of the 
situation made many votes for the school bill. And there was a further erect: in the 
first legislative session following the campaign a law was passed prohibiting the 
wearing of any religious garb whatsoever by any teacher in any public school of 

It is a peculiar fact that, with possibly one or two exceptions, no organization 
supported the bill with unanimity throughout its membership. In the Scottish Rite 
itself there was a small minority of dissenters. Blue Lodge Masons were divided. 
While many of the most influential voices in Oregon Masonry were raised in its 
support, a few equally influential ones were lifted against it, including that of Hon 
George G. Brown, of Salem, Grand Master for Oregon. Undoubtedly the great 
majority of Oregon Masons voted for the bill, but there was an opposing minority 
respectable in its proportions and worthy of respect in its personnel. 


Most Protestant church memberships showed similar division of sentiment regarding 
the bill. The Lutheran church organization opposed the bill, because it maintains 
sectarian schools of its own. Certain supporters of the bill brought out during the 
campaign that Lutheran schools had existed in Oregon wherein all the teaching was 
done in German. English was never spoken there. It may be conceded that Lutherans 
quite generally, if not unanimously, opposed the bill. So, probably, did the Seventh 
Day Adventists. While the Episcopal church organization opposed the measure 
strongly, there can be no doubt that many members of that church supported it. At 
Corvallis, where a session of the Oregon Presbytery was held while the campaign was 
in progress, twenty-five Presbyterian ministers signed a resolution of opposition to 
the bill and this was heralded forth as an official action, but so many other 
Presbyterians, lay and ministerial, set up a clamor of protest that the only conclusion 
the public could reach was that the Presbyterian church was divided on the subject, as 
most other organizations were. The question of support of or opposition to the bill 
was quite generally a matter of individual judgment and conscience. And the result 

showed that 1 1,821 more Oregon voters judged and decided in favor of the bill than 
opposed it. The official vote was: Ayes, 1 15,506; Noes, 103,685. 

But notwithstanding that Oregon is on record as standing for the universal Little Red 
Schoolhouse, through enactment of this law, the battle is not over. Interests which 
opposed the bill, headed lay the Knights of Columbus, have announced that they will 
attack the law in the courts. Archbishop Alexander Christie, of Oregon, and Frank J. 
Lonergan, head of the Knights of Columbus organization in this state, recently made 
a trip to Washington and New York to help organize this proposed attack. Backing 
them are other denominational and private school interests. 

While the ground of this proposed attack will undoubtedly be an allegation of 
unconstitutionality of the law its exact line and scope have not been made known. 
Undoubtedly its basis will be the same as that cited, during the campaign by 
opponents of the bill in their charges of unconstitutionality which is that of the first 
amendment to the Federal Constitution and second, third and fourth articles of the 
Bill of Rights of the state of Oregon. The constitutional amendment reads: 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting 
the free exercise thereof; or abridge the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right 
of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of 

And sections numbered 2, 3 and 4 of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of Oregon, 
read thus: 

"Sec. 2. Freedom of Worship - All men shall be secured in the natural right to 
worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences. 

"Sec. 3. No law shall in any case whatever control the free exercise and enjoyment of 
religious opinion or interfere with the rights of conscience. 

"Sec. 4. No religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of trust or 

When Judge Cleland drafted the Oregon bill he knew all about the amendment quoted 
and the Bill of Rights as well. He so drafted the bill that, in his opinion and in the 
opinion of other eminent attorneys with whom he conferred, it did not in the least 
conflict with any of the prohibitions quoted. Both the affirmation for and the 
contention against the legality of the bill have been backed by attorneys of standing 
and reputation as lawyers. 


In support of their contention the opponents of the bill cite as a precedent a Michigan 
case of October 1, 1920, wherein the Secretary of State had denied a place on the 
ballot on the ground of alleged unconstitutionality to a compulsory public school 
attendance hill. A mandamus action was brought and a majority of five judges of the 
Supreme Court granted the mandamus on the ground that the Secretary of State, a 
ministerial officer, was not the judge of the constitutionality of the act. A minority of 
three judges went outside of this question and handed down a decision, written by 
Justice Fellows, who said: 

"While the proposed amendment is very carefully worded to attract votes, it takes 
from the parent the privilege of educating his children in parochial or private schools; 
indeed it takes from them the right to exercise any control over the education of their 
own offspring and gives such right to the state. It prohibits the conduct of the business 
of educating children by private parties, denominations and corporations, organized 
for that purpose under our laws, and takes from them without compensation the right 
to use for educational purposes property owned by them and devoted to that use, 
admitted to be worth seventy millions of dollars. 

"Some 120,000 children between the ages of 5 and 16 years are now being educated 
in the parochial schools of the state. The instructions cover the usual branches taught 
in the public schools, and in addition there is moral training and the doctrine of the 
Christian religion is inculcated in these youthful minds. That these schools may be 
regulated by the state is admitted on all hands, but that their existence may be 
prohibited by state mandate is an entirely different proposition. Before the bossiness 
of educating the young in the same course taught by the public schools, before the 
business of educating the young in the Christian religion, before the business of 
conducting these parochial schools, can be outlawed and prohibited, their prohibition 
mast bear some reasonable relation to the public good, or the public health, or the 
public morals, or the public safety or the public welfare. The right to regulate I 
concede; the right to prohibit 1 deny." 

This minority decision is to be cited by the opponents of the Oregon law in bringing 
their own case. 

Just what is in the minds of the law's opponents to do in case they lose their case, as 
friends of the Oregon law believe they will, had not been generally indicated, but 
what one of the chief Facials of the Knights of Columbus would do is indicated by his 
own words. On a recent visit to Portland, Joseph Scott of Los Angeles, heralded as "a 
Knight of St. Gregory in recognition of his world services for Catholicism," addressed 
a large gathering of Knights of Columbus and said, in the course of his remarks: 

"We expect you men here to defend your homes against those who, masquerading as 
so-called Americans, are none else than dyed-in-the-wool hypocrites. We'll expect 
you not to give any quarter and to adopt a no-temporizing attitude in dealing with this 
type of scrub. They are an ignorant, unintelligent set of mercenary scoundrels and 
grafters. Their doctrines are against the real principles of Americanism and our 
conceptions of our duties to state, nation, church and family cannot but make us 
antagonistic to them." 

This incident is not given here as purporting to show a general trend of thought 
among opponents of the school law, Catholic or Protestant. Indeed, this writer will 
say frankly that he does not believe such sentiments are held or backed by any 
considerable proportion of the membership even of the Knights of Columbus, who 
are, in their great preponderance, law-respecting and law-abiding. But the incident 
does show how one high official of the Knights of Columbus thinks and how he talks. 
And the picture he presents is not pretty. 

— o — 

"All good Masons are peaceable subjects to the powers that be, and never suffer 
themselves to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of 
the nation, to behave undutifully to the lawful authorities, or countenance a brother in 
his rebellion, though he may be pitied as an unhappy man." Selected. 

— o — 


The Education of the Heart Is Necessary 

The education of Masons in Masonry involves a consideration of fundamentals and 
the beginning of Masonic life and experience. There we learn that we are first 
"prepared to be made Masons in our heart." It was not a physical or a mental 
preparation, but an emotional one in the truest sense of that word. Then we were 
hoodwinked that "our hearts might be taught to conceive before our eyes beheld the 
beauties of Masonry." Thus the beginning of our Masonic education was in the heart, 
as distinguished from the head. "With the heart man believeth unto righteousness," so 
with the heart man commences his education in Masonry. 

What is meant by heart education? Our fathers as Operative Masons worked in the 
tangible, the concrete, and in the material, while we in the present day work as 
Speculative Masons. It is not the power of arriving at certain conclusions and thus 
governing ourselves accordingly: it is rather that responsive faculty of our being 
which seeks some indefinite object which can alone meet its needs and desires and 
then accept that as the sum total of life. 

We devote considerable time and attention to the education of the other faculties such 
as the will, imagination, and mental and physical powers, but devote only a limited 
amount of time to the education of the heart. This results in many men with small 
hearts, devoid of broad and generous impulses. It produces men with cold hearts and 
never with tender affection - hearts as cold as marble and lacking in love and 

The education of the heart involves two steps. First, fellowship with the principles of 
Masonry. This requires a mastery and understanding of the ritual and fellowship with 
brethren in both public and private life, and in addition the taking part in all of the 
work within the lodge. Second, service to man. Work in this field enlarges the heart 
and consecrates life with a new gladness and a different viewpoint. A large and noble 
heart comes through companionship and service, and the best way to educate Masons 
is by constant companionship with Masons and their principles and service for 
Masonry and the world. 

In carrying out this plan, the Grand Lodge of North Dakota has established a 
committee on Masonic Service and Education, consisting of five members. This 
Committee selects an Executive Secretary, whose duties are to oversee the Masonic 
Education programs of the state. He is to visit each lodge sometime during the year, 
assist the lodges in arranging their programs of Masonic service, and arrange for 
speakers to deliver various bulletins issued by the Masonic Service Association of the 
United States, and in addition, to assist each lodge in working out some plan of 
Masonic service during the year to bring about a betterment of community life in 

Edwin A. Ripley, Grand Master, North Dakota. 

Study Classes and Lectures Should Be Used 

The best way to educate Masons in Masonry is to hold before the initiated and newly 
made Mason seriously the ideals for which the Fraternity stands. This is best 
accomplished by a serious and reverent attitude in the conferring of the degrees. Then 
some time should be set apart to a serious study of the meaning attached to the 
symbolism of the Craft, and this should be presented to the members of the lodge 
through lectures by well informed brethren or study classes where the members shall 
meet and take up in detail one after another the ceremonies and symbols as they are 
presented in the degrees, beginning with their earliest esoteric meaning and follow 
them through the ages up to a consideration of their present significance. If this can 
be consistently carried out and the brethren discouraged from applying for so called 
"higher degrees," Masons will become Masons in truth as well as lodge members. 

Edward P. Hufferd, Grand Master, Colorado. 

— o — 

World-Wide Masonry and Its Desirability 


WE READ in our Monitors and in the effusions of Masonic orators of the 
"Universality of Masonry," and how that Masonry “unites men of every country, sect 
and opinion." We are told that in the great cities, that in the depths of the forests of 
Africa and South America, that on the vast steppes of Asia, and on the plains and 
deserts of Arabia, Masons are to be found everywhere, and ready to make themselves 
known by the familiar words, signs and tokens, and to extend succor and relief even 
at the peril of their own lives. We stare, and our bosoms heave with pride that we 
belong to so beneficent and so universal a brotherhood. It is a beautiful fiction which 
it is a pity to destroy, but the lamentable fact is there is not a word of truth in it. 

Many of you will, therefore, be shocked and disappointed when I tell you that there is 
not and never has been and, if many of our most estimable brethren can have their 
way, there never will be universal Masonry. Many of the greatest regions and 
peoples of earth are utterly destitute of Freemasonry, while the Masonry which exists 
among many others is repudiated and denied by each other and by the Masonry of the 
English speaking countries. Some Grand Lodges admittedly recognize only those 
grand bodies which speak English; others while not professing this standard, made it 
good in practice. Some draw a line on those which do not quite agree with them on 
some religious dogma or as to just how far Masonry may take part in the political 
questions of the day, or on some rule of mere practice or policy on which uniformity 
has never existed among the recognized Masonic bodies. The most trivial and absurd 
difference in either doctrine or practice is seized upon by some Grand Lodge, which 
imagines it is the conservator of pure and unadulterated Freemasonry, to erect 
impassable barriers between the Masonic bodies of the world. Among the most 
rancorous disputes that the world has ever witnessed are those that have raged over 
questions of minor or no importance. Only the disputes among the religious sects and 
denominations can be compared to them. 

The intolerance on the part of many Masons and Masonic bodies towards others 
claiming to be Masonic is so extreme that they frown even on any suggestion of 
getting acquainted or of even conferring together. So illiberal is this attitude of 
aloofness that nearly all of our American Grand Lodges would draw their Pharisaical 
robes around them and spurn with contempt any suggestion of a World Masonic 
Conference, or any other movement which would bring together with them Masons or 
bodies which they have not already formally recognized as legitimate and regular 
Freemasonry. In other words, we will have nothing to do with men or organizations 
which are not already perfect according to our standards and which consequently 

already need no help from us and from whom of course we ourselves need no help. 
Self sufficient in our own conceit, we will not admit that we can learn anything of 
value from the Masons of other countries and in our smug complacency we say that 
the are "impossible" as Masons. It is precisely the same mental attitude of Greek 
toward barbarian, Ancient Hebrew toward Gentile, Pharisee toward Samaritan, which 
we so unsparingly condemn in others, but which we, (as-they), can not see in 


All will admit that this is not a desirable condition, all are hoping that it may be 
changed, but every one is demanding and expecting that this change shall be wrought 
by everybody else conforming to his views of what is correct. This ignorant and 
narrow provincialism will forever prevent the Masons of the world getting together. 
Until we recognize that, though we may be right, yet others who differ from us may 
not be wrong; till we concede the possibility that, while in the main right, we may, 
nevertheless, be in a measure wrong; till we admit that, while they err in some 
respects, in the main they may be right; till we can realize that there are two sides to 
every question that arises between sincere and honorable men; till we are willing to 
get acquainted with our Masonic neighbors, to learn and attempt to understand their 
point of view, to put ourselves in their places, to meet them for mutual study of each 
other, to exercise that truly Masonic virtue of charity, we must dismiss all hopes of a 
real world-wide Masonic fraternity. 

If we differ with them as to the Masonic necessity of a declaration of a belief in 
Deity, we must be prepared to admit that there are two sides to this question, when we 
see such men among us as Louis Block of Iowa, George W. Baird of the District of 
Columbia, William F. Kuhn of Missouri, Sam Henry Goodwin of Utah, and James A. 
Bilbro of Alabama, taking directly opposite positions on the question. We must be 
willing to meet and discuss this question with them, and maybe we shall find we are 
not so far apart after all. 

If we see that differences of view as to the nature of the Deity are keeping us apart, 
we must first be prepared to admit that there are not only two but many sides to this 
question, since we see scarcely any two of our ablest Masonic scholars agreeing on 
it. Indeed we see the greatest theologians and philosophers differing upon it as they 
have always differed. Perhaps we should find by approaching this question in an 
open frame of mind that Masonry does not prescribe what one's beliefs shall be as to 
the attributes of Deity. 

If we find that opinions as to the presence of the Bible on the altar are separating us, 
we might remember that the Bible was not a part of the paraphernalia of the lodge for 
nearly a half century after the founding of the Grand Lodge of England, and that even 
today it is not on the altar of the British lodges but on the Master's pedestal, and that 
the Grand Lodge of England, admits that the Koran, or the Vedas, or the Zend Avesta 
may be used in place of the Bible. 

If views as to the office of the Bible in lodge separate us, if some insist that Masons 
must believe all its teachings, while others claim it is displayed as a symbol of divine 
truth, we must be prepared to admit that there is room for difference here, since we 
continue to admit as Masons men who do not accept any part of the Bible and many 
others who reject at least one-half of it. 


If we draw the line on those who, we think, engage in polities let us imagine, if we 
can, what the Masonic Fraternity of the United States would do if some party were to 
arise in this country which openly declared against free speech, freedom of the press, 
freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and in favor of domination of the State 
by the Church. If Masonry did not fight such propositions it would perish, yet these 
are precisely the propositions which confront Masonry in France, Belgium, Spain, 
Italy, and in all South and Central American nations, not to mention Mexico and 
numerous other countries. There are certain great fundamental political questions 
which Masonry always and everywhere has professed and for which, if it is not 
willing to fight, it is not worthy to exist. A little serious investigation might show that 

the political activities of the Masonry which we condemn in other countries is no 
more than precisely what we should and would do under the same circumstances. 

As Foreign Correspondent I have frequent occasions to observe the extreme 
narrowness sometimes manifested on this question. Let me illustrate with one 

A certain very able Reviewer in an English speaking country was horrified and 
astonished when the Grand Orient of Italy invited the Grand Lodges of the world to 
participate with it in the celebration of the victory of Italy in 1870 over the Pope of 
Rome and the consequent downfall of the papacy as a temperal power in Italy. This 
distinguished brother thought that for such "meddling in polities" the Grand Orient 
should be cast into outer darkness and utterly excluded from the Masonic pale. 

I think any philanthropic, charitable or fraternal organization anywhere in the world 
may with the greatest propriety join in the celebration of so distinct a step in advance 
taken by humanity. Should any Grand Lodge of the United States of America which 
dares to celebrate the Fourth of July be excluded from the Masonic pale? Would there 
be any impropriety in the Grand Lodge of England, or any other Grand Lodge or 
Grand Orient, celebrating the signing of Magna Charta, or the granting of the English 
Bill of Rights, or the disestablishment of the Church anywhere as a political or 
governmental agency? Could Masons not with propriety observe the birthday of 
Martin Luther, or of John Knox, or of John Wycliffe? Why may they not celebrate the 
victories of Oliver Cromwell, or the burning of Savonarola, or Joan of Arc, or the 
flight of Roger Williams, or of the Pilgrim Fathers, or of the French Huguenots from 
religious persecution? We as Masons make much of George Washington in this 
country and even in England. Is any one so simple as to believe this is not chiefly 
because he was a great and successful warrior and a wise statesman - politician, if you 
please? Why may not Masons as such take public pride in the successful attempt of 
the politicians of any people anywhere to separate Church and State? Or to shake off 
the shackles which either Church or State has attempted to fasten upon freedom of 
thought, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, or freedom of action? If Masons 
may not do these things what may they do besides confer degrees and bestow alms? 


If a refusal to admit the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction in our eyes 
renders a Grand Lodge anathema, we should remember that at the beginning this 
doctrine was nowhere recognized and that today it is not recognized at all in many 
countries and recognized only as a wise and sound policy in others. In several 
countries two or more systems exist in perfect harmony alongside each other. Should 
not these facts give us pause and suggest that in this question is involved nothing of 
principle that ought to keep Masons apart? It is possible that by frank discussion we 
might be able, to show our brethren of other countries the wisdom and advantages of 
this policy. 

Grand Lodges of so-called Ancient Craft origin often refuse to recognize those of 
Scottish Rite origin because no one has ever been able to give a convincing account 
of the regularity of origin of Scottish Rite Masonry. But it should be remembered 
that, though we can carry the history of Ancient Craft Masonry nearly a hundred 
years further back than we can that of the Scottish Rite, yet the regularity of the origin 
of Modern Ancient Craft Masonry can no more be shown than can that of the Scottish 
Rite. There are at least plausible grounds for belief that the Scottish Rite is but a 
development from the Ancient Craft. Possibly by getting together and talking it over 
the Scottish Rite Supreme Councils and Scottish Rite Masons generally might be 
convinced of the wisdom of adopting the plan so successfully adopted in the United 
States, England and some other countries of not interfering with the first three or 
symbolic degrees but leaving them to the exclusive jurisdiction of Grand Lodges. 

One may ask, "Is Masonic Universality desirable, will it be productive of any benefits 
or advantages?" To ask this question is to challenge the value of Freemasonry 
altogether, to question whether it is worth while at all, for if it is good for one man it 
is good for all men, and if it is not good for all it is worthless for any. It also denies 
the truism that "in union is strength." I believe no intelligent Mason can be found who 
will deny the desirability of a world-wide Fraternity teaching and practicing the 
doctrines we profess. 

One may then ask, "How are the conditions above pointed out to be corrected?" Our 
answer is, not by the methods we have been employing, not by refusing to have any 
communication with each other, not by standing aloof and denouncing each other, not 
by regarding as contaminating or unclean Masons and Masonic bodies merely 
because upon some one or all of these questions they differ from us. 


First, we would suggest that the International Masonic Association, at Geneva, 
Switzerland, be supported and developed until it becomes as it was planned to be, a 
real center from which can be secured Prompt and reliable information concerning all 
Masonic movements and activities on the continent of Europe especially. 

Secondly, we already have in the National Masonic Research Society, of Iowa, an 
organization that might be made to perform a like service in this country. Or if this 
Society is not well adapted or well located for the purpose one could be easily 
devised. The principal thing would be to provide the financial support and the men 
equal to the task and tell them to go to work in their own way to get the information, 

Thirdly, our Committees on Foreign Correspondence should endeavor to get facts and 
lay them before their respective Grand Lodges rather than revamping half-baked 
opinions founded on fragmentary or false information. Preconceived opinions, or 
opinions of a past generation, should be laid aside and the whole question examined 

Fourthly, intelligent Masons visiting foreign countries should be encouraged to visit 
the lodges there and get first-hand information, instead of being forbidden to do so as 
is now the rule. Occasionally, carefully selected delegations night be sent for this 
purpose. The information procured by these means should be given free publicity. 
All this would cost some money, it is true, but not more than could be easily 
provided. Fifthly, a World Congress of Freemasons should be held periodically, say 

every five years, without any legislative powers but authorized only to discuss and 
express opinions on Masonic questions. 

The first of such congresses should be held in England as the oldest Masonic country, 
or in the United States as the one having the greatest number of Masons. The list of 
Grand Bodies invited should, while being carefully selected, not be too restricted. It 
should be distinctly understood that invitation to and participation in the congress was 
not the equivalent of recognition. It should not be lost sight of that the main purposes 
of the congress were to get acquainted with each other, to provide opportunity for 
discussion and exchange of ideas, and the securing and imparting of information. 

I am well aware that some brothers will raise their hands in horror and say that I am 
suggesting a Universal Grand Lodge. That cry has killed every movement for 
Masonic solidarity that has ever been suggested, but this scarecrow has long enough 
prevented cooperation among Masons. I am as much opposed to a General, or 
Supreme, or Universal Grand Lodge as are these brethren, but I can see the difference 
between such a body and one convened merely for conference and discussion. 

finally, we must rid ourselves of the self-righteous idea that by having any 
communication or association with Masons or Masonic bodies not already recognized 
as regular, we render ourselves unclean. We shall not be hurt Masonically socially, or 
morally, by meeting and discussing Masonry with men whom we may never 
technically recognize as Masons. 

If the dream of Universal Masonry is ever to be realized a beginning must be made. 
Brethren and Masonic bodies must be found of sufficient vision to take the lead and 
of sufficient perseverance and courage to keep the movement moving. We believe 
that a few years of effort along the lines we have indicated would result in a much 
better understanding among the Masonic bodies of the world. 

— o — 

Ben Franklin, Patron of Many Arts 

By Bro. JAMES MURRAY, New York 

Franklin is easily the greatest figure of this continent prior to the Revolutionary War, 
and since then none but Washington and Lincoln have arisen to dispute his solitary 
eminence. After the fashion of some unexpected development in Nature, he appeared 
among the Colonists like a visitor from another star, the first humanist of America, 
and the first humorist, a great towering soul who believed in life and tried to let the 
light shine. The author of this essay has caught something of the blithesome spirit of 
his subject, for the which we may each one be grateful, seeing that in these days of 
world desolation and regret, Franklin's indomitable and happy spirit is not the least of 
the many treasurers we have need of from the past. 

AT THE BICENTENNIAL celebration of the birth of Benjamin Franklin more than 
seventy wreaths were placed on his statue in Printing House Square, Park Row, New 
York, by organizations and industries, including the Grand Lodge of New York, to 
which Franklin had made unique contributions. How wonderful is the man whom no 
less than seventy organizations claim as their own! To each he had given something 
so vital and so necessary that on his two hundredth birthday anniversary they 
delighted to do him honor! What a heritage with which to endow posterity! Surely, 
such a life is well worth the attention that his celebration has created. 

The Autobiography, which so inimitably tells the story of his earlier years, ranks, in 
the charm, vividness and simplicity of its faultless style, among the few masterpieces 
of English prose. The author catalogs with astonishing frankness the mistakes of his 
youth, not with any pleasure in the recollection of them, but in the hope of saving 
others from similar slips. The pages of the Autobiography are still the best source 
from which to refresh one's knowledge of this period of Franklin's career. The 
modern writer had best go forward as speedily as possible to the point where his 
public services began. 

At the tender age of ten he was taken from school to assist his father in the business 
of a tallow chandler and soap boiler, a trade that he greatly disliked. At the age of 
twelve he was apprenticed to his brother, a printer. Although this work was much 
more congenial, he met with such discouragement, abuse and disappointment that he 
ran away and we next find him seeking independent employment at his trade, first in 
Philadelphia and later in London. The boy printer, the runaway apprentice, the young 
journeyman, friendless, penniless and far from home in these distant cities, are 
pictures that have been made familiar to many generations of American readers. 

On returning to Philadelphia, Franklin bought the Pennsylvania Gazette and by 
judicious management was able to discharge, by installments, his indebtedness. As 
he prospered financially, he suggested and carried forward scheme after scheme of 
civic improvement. These public spirited activities secured for him the attention and 
influence that follow success in practical affairs and caused him shortly to be 
regarded as one of the foremost citizens of his adopted city. 

To further his schemes he was fond of organizing men into associations and 
developed a singular aptitude for creating, conducting and perpetuating such bodies. 
Among others, the Junto, a select club, which was a power in local affairs, was the 
child of his brain. It was a paper which he read before this body on the lack of 
organization in Philadelphia for extinguishing fires that led to the formation of the 
Union Fire Company. Years later, Franklin boasted with pride that the "city had 
never lost by fire more than one or two houses at a time," and that "the flames have 
often been extinguished before the house in which they began had been half 

The example of Franklin, like that of Lincoln, will ever be an inspiration to the home 
student. He deliberately trained himself in English composition and the ability to 
write he thus acquired gave him not only his entrance into polities but much of his 
success as a philosopher and statesman. Poor Richard's Almanac became a pulpit 
from which Franklin preached to a multitude. The epigrams of Poor Richard are as 
renowned as any collection in English literature. His political and social satires bear 
comparison with those of the greatest satirists. In a word, Franklin, from his earliest 

days, was a born teacher of men and ranks among the world's most distinguished 
moralists. But, though an earnest preacher of morality, he was never identified with 
any religious organization. The fact that he was a Freemason relieves him of the 
charge of having been an atheist. He possessed the rarest kind of tolerance and 
accommodated himself easily to the customs of his associates but, in the end, and 
after much meditation, he formulated a creed of his own. 

His first public office came to him in 1736 when he was chosen clerk of the General 
Assembly. This post he continued to occupy for fourteen years when he was elected 
a member. In 1737, he was appointed postmaster of Philadelphia, an office which he 
found, as he says, "of great advantage, for though the salary was small it facilitated 
the correspondence that improved my newspaper." The postmaster general of the 
Colonies recognized Franklin's practical ability by employing him as "his controller 
in regulating the several offices and bringing the officers to account" and when, in 
1753, the postmaster general died, Franklin became his successor. 

Amid the crowding occupations of these busy years Franklin found time for the 
scientific research toward which heart always yearned. Besides entrapping the 
lightning from the clouds with his kite, he performed countless other experiments and 
wrote treatises upon them which, collected into a volume, "made no small stir in 
France and were taken much notice of in England." 

In his Autobiography, he records with just pride that he received the degree of Master 
of Arts first from Yale College and afterwards from Harvard. "Thus without studying 
in any college," he says, "I came to partake of their honors. They were conferred in 
consideration of my improvements and discoveries in the electric branch of natural 
philosophy." The Universities of St. Andrew, Edinburgh and Oxford, in succession, 
later conferred upon him the degree of Doctor of Laws in recognition of his 
diplomatic services in Great Britain. 

Franklin's head was never turned by the many honors that he received and he did not 
hesitate when opportunity offered to make a joke at his own expense. One of his 
electrical experiments was an attempt to kill a turkey by shock. He himself received 

the full effect of the electrical discharge and he was rendered unconscious. When 
restored his first remark was, "Well, I meant to kill a turkey and instead I nearly killed 
a goose." 

In 1764 the Pennsylvania Assembly selected him for an important mission to Great 
Britain and the Colony also appointed him their agent. Such was his industry and 
success that year by year Pennsylvania reappointed him. Later Massachusetts, New 
Jersey and Georgia in succession voted him their agent. Thus for some years he 
represented no less than four of the American Colonies. His life in London as 
Colonial Agent brought him into contact with England's leading men and with many 
distinguished foreigners from continental Europe with results the importance of 
which can scarcely be magnified. His new duties not only trained him in diplomacy 
but immeasurably broadened his horizon. In his Autobiography Franklin remarks that 
his father used often to quote the proverb, "A man who is diligent in business shall 
stand before kings." He adds with pardonable pride that he had "stood before four 
kings and dined with three of them." When the Stamp Act was introduced in the 
English Parliament and the shadow of the Revolutionary War began to fall over the 
Colonies, the figure of Franklin stood sole and unique among the Colonists as a 
master of diplomacy and international affairs. As a statesman he sought to find 
means whereby amicable relations between the Mother Country and the Colonies 
could be maintained. He labored unweariedly to prevent a breach. But his opposition 
to the policy of the British ministry began with their earliest attempts to tax the 
Colonies. To a friend he wrote: "Depend on it, my good neighbor, I took every step 
in my power to prevent the passing of the Stamp Act. Nobody could be more 
concerned than I to oppose it sincerely and heartily." But he was not yet ready to part 
with old lamps for new ones. He wrote: "At heart I am no revolutionist. I believe in 
purifying, not in breaking down. I would to God that 1 could have convinced the 
British of their error." 

In those days of agitation, he was still the philosopher and sage and his views were 
far in advance of his times. "All wars are follies," he maintained, "very expensive 
and very mischievous ones." "When will mankind," he asked, "be convinced of this 
and agree to settle their differences by arbitration?" 

His departure marked an era in the relations of Great Britain and her American 
colonies. All hope of agreement, all possibility of reconciliation upon one side, or of 
recession upon the other, was absolutely over when Franklin shook from his feet the 
dust of the Mother Country. That he gave up in despair of maintaining peace meant 
that war was certain and imminent. 

He arrived in Philadelphia, May 5, 1775, and, two months later, formulated the first 
plan for the confederation of the Colonies to be presented to Congress. Then for 
eighteen months he toiled in the domestic service of his country. Useful as were his 
labors at home, however, his presence as a trained negotiator, schooled by fourteen 
years of the most difficult kind of diplomatic service, was indispensable abroad, and 
in September, 1776, he was elected envoy to France. The wisdom of this choice and 
the estimate set by Europe upon his abilities were indicated by the excitement which 
was created by his arrival at the French capitol. During his residence in Paris, he 
exercised an influence with the French minister which can hardly be exaggerated. 
Throughout the War for long and weary months communication between the two 
countries was extremely slow. The only news to reach Paris was colored by passing 
through Great Britain, and France was most guarded in her attitude and reluctant to 
take an open stand upon the side of the Colonies. Thus in the dread year of 1777 tales 
travelled across the Channel that Washington was drawing off the remnant of his 
forces in a demoralized retreat and that Philadelphia had fallen before Howe. 

Franklin, however, refused to despair for his country. When told that Howe had taken 
Philadelphia he laughingly replied: "No, sir, Philadelphia has taken Howe." 

The brunt fell upon Franklin from first to last to keep the Colonies from financial 
failure, just as Washington alone stood between his country and military disaster. Yet 
to many, Franklin's task would have been far more difficult than that of Washington. 
He alone at Paris could tap the rock and make the waters flow. So Congress relied 
upon him to discharge all foreign bills and indebtedness and poured upon him an 
endless flood of drafts. After much personal discouragement and discomfort, he 
obtained from the King a promise of a free gift of 6,000,000 livres in addition to 
3,000,000 furnished for interest drafts and eventually by his personal influence and 
popularity he brought about the decisive French alliance. 

Throughout his career Franklin commanded men's confidence. To the exclusion of 
his colleagues, he enjoyed a monopoly of the respect and personal regard of the 
French ministry. And even the English, when they made advances for conciliation, 
addressed to him their communications. Erasmus Darwin wrote in a letter to him: 
"Whilst I am writing to the philosopher and friend, I can scarcely forget that I am also 
writing to the greatest statesman of the present, and perhaps of any century, who has 
spread the happy contagion of liberty among his countrymen and, like the greatest 
man of all antiquity, the leader of the Jews, has delivered them from the house of 
bondage and the scourge of oppression." Jefferson when he succeeded Franklin as 
minister at the French court wrote: "No one can replace him, I am only his successor." 

Franklin was made a Mason in the Tun Tavern Lodge in 1732 or thereabouts, and 
from his printing press in Philadelphia two years later was sent the first book on 
Freemasonry ever published in America - a reprint of Anderson's The Constitutions of 
the Freemasons. The first Masonic lodges organized in Philadelphia held annual 
festivals and elected Grand Masters without written authority from the ruling Grand 
Lodge of England, or any of its dependencies, by virtue of the immemorial right of 
Masons, and in due course Franklin became "Grand Master of Pennsylvania." 

Both Franklin and his son were treated with marked distinction by the Masonic 
Fraternity in London. In Paris, he was elected member of the famous French Lodge 
of the Nine Sisters of which many distinguished Frenchmen were members. 

Among illustrious Americans, Franklin stands preeminent. The study of his 
character, his mind and his career are of perennial interest. One becomes attached to 
him, bids him farewell with regret and feels that for such as he the longest span of life 
is far too short. The faults and defects of character and conduct that are urged against 
him appear trivial when compared with the affection and admiration he inspired in the 
great mass of mankind both in the generations contemporary with him and in those 
which know him only as one of the great figures of history. 

Franklin had instinctively the noblest of all ambitions, that of being of practical use to 
his fellow men. To promote the welfare of mankind was the chief motive of his life. 

Every moment he could snatch from enforced occupations was devoted to doing, 
devising, or suggesting something advantageous to the human race. As a patriot, 
none surpassed him. Intellectually few men of any age or nation are his peers. He 
covered, and covered well, vast ground. He was one of the most distinguished of all 
scientists. He was a profound thinker and preacher in morals and the conduct of life. 
Excepting only the founders of great religions, it would be difficult to name any 
person who has exerted greater influence upon the ideas, motives and habits of human 

Franklin died in Philadelphia April 17, 1790, in his eighty-fifth year. More than 
twenty thousand persons attended his funeral. He was not buried with Masonic rites, 
for the "Modern" lodges of which he had been "Grand Master" had become extinct 
during his long sojourn abroad and had been succeeded by the "Ancients." His 
memory, however, has never grown dim among Masons. They cherish him as one of 
their forebears who, through wise counsel, patriotism, untiring zeal and unswerving 
loyalty helped to lay the corner stone of a great Nation. 

His attributes demand endless descriptive adjectives - all of which seem weak and 
pulpless when describing a man whose talents were so versatile that he excelled in 
whatever he embraced - whether science, art, industry, diplomacy, commerce, or 

What a pity that this age of specialization uncompromisingly demands that, if a man 
be a scientist, he shall not be a philosopher: if he be an industrial man, he must not be 
a poet! The jack-of-all-trades today is despised. Twentieth century philosophy is: 
know one thing but know it well! And there like a shining beacon light stands 
Franklin, patron saint of more than three score arts and industries, who was all and 
excelled in each. A man who in his life lived many lives and lived them all fully and 

— o — 

The Origin of the Legend of the Third Degree 

By Bro. R. J. MEEKREN, Canada 

The author of this paper is in charge of a group of members of the National Masonic 
Research Society who are making a special study of the Legend of the Third Degree. 
These brethren cooperate with each other through the mail. Their findings will in due 
course appear in THE BUILDER and ultimately, it is hoped, in book form. Such 
brethren as may wish to join in this fascinating study may send their names to THE 
BUILDER, or, better still, may communicate directly with Brother R. J. Meckren, 
Stanstead, Quebec, Canada. The Society is already indebted to Brother Meekren for 
many labours: the keen insight revealed in the following paper shows how well 
qualified he is to conduct special researches, and leads one to prophesy that we shall 
be very much more indebted to him in the future. 

A QUESTION OF PERENNIAL interest to Masonic students is the origin of the 
Legend of the Third Degree. The margin of disagreement is constantly shrinking, for 
whereas not so very long ago opinions varied all the way from a literal acceptance of 
the tale as veritable history to the assertion that it was invented by Anderson or 
Desaguliers or some one else in or about 1723, it is now, one would judge, very 
generally agreed that we are not dealing with history, nor yet with fiction in the 
literary sense, but with an allegorical drama of the nature of the Mystery or Miracle 
plays of the Middle Ages, of the type of Everyman, of the more elaborate Passion 
Play of Oberammergau; and further, that the plot is archaic, ancient, and traditional. 
The discussion now lies within these limits: "Was this plot once public property, and 
if so, when and under what circumstances did it become an integral part of the 
Masonic Ritual?" 

Bro. D.E.W. Williamson, in his article in THE BUILDER for May, 1922, page 144, 
would seem to be of the opinion that it was once public property and came into the 

tradition of the Craft somewhere between 1535 and 1546 through the medium of 
Tyndale's or Coverdale's versions of the Bible. The facts are important. Previous 
versions (which were in manuscript, by the way) were translations from the Latin of 
the Vulgate; Tyndale's was a translation from the Hebrew in which the title "Abi" or 
"Abif ' was rendered as part of the name, whereas in the Septuagint, the ancient Greek 
version, and in the Latin versions which were taken from it, the word was translated 
"my father." The coincidence is too remarkable to be fortuitous, and we are obliged to 
conclude that this short-lived version of the Bible had something to do with our 
Legend, as it is told today. But does this necessarily imply that it was at this time that 
the story was invented? The archaic character of the story makes this scarcely even 
possible. Was it at this time that it was adapted to the purposes of Masonic Ritual? 
Many considerations tend to incline us to a negative answer. And not the least of 
these is the argument very forcefully put by Brother J.S.M. Ward in his Freemasonry 
and the Ancient Gods, [see THE BUILDER, May, 1922, page 151] to the effect that 
the Fraternity is, and has always been so far as any indication goes, a secret society, 
or a society holding secrets. To this one may add that it is also, and always has been, 
intensely conservative. 


In seeking "more light" upon the subject it may not be unprofitable to turn a little 
further afield. The bringing in of ancient religious mysteries and such like material to 
explain Masonic usages is rather discredited now-a-days, but the fault lies perhaps 
with the mode of employment rather than with the facts themselves. It may help us 
not a little to realize that what we are dealing with in the Third Degree is myth, and 
this equally whether the Legend has always been part of the tradition of the Craft, or 
an eighteenth or Sixteenth century importation. Like other myths it has grown; and 
also it is the expression of the feeling of a social group. Like others, too, it has been 
first interpreted as history, and then as conscious invention, and now it is ready for 
scientific treatment. 

By classifying it as a myth, in the technical sense, we are enabled to use in its 
elucidation the conclusions of anthropologists and students of the history and 
evolution of mythology and religion. Within the brief space of an article it is not 

possible to do more than barely state some of the more important of these 
conclusions, but even so it may be worth our while. 

First, and as stated above, myth is the expression of the feelings and ideals of a social 
group. That this is preeminently so in the present case hardly needs to be pointed 
out. Secondly, it is normally the explanation of custom. Tylor's Primitive Culture, a 
work to be found in most public libraries of any size, will satisfy any inquirer on this 
point. From this it would follow that our Ritual preceded the Legend. Of course this 
rule is not absolute, for, in modem imitations of our Order, as well as in the "higher" 
degree, the process has been reversed. But these are cases of conscious and deliberate 
invention, and not of growth and survival to which alone the above principle properly 
applies. And in comparing such inventions with the genuine myth the difference at 
once strikes the discerning eye. Even in these cases it is curious to trace the influence 
of the "Work" upon the "Legend." A staking example is the Mark Degree, where the 
original story has been greatly modified to fit a matured and simplified ritual. This 
agrees with the hypothesis of Brother Race, in a paper published in the Transactions 
of the Lodge of Research, Leicester, for a knowledge of which the present writer is 
indebted to the kindness of the Editor of THE BUILDER. In this paper the internal 
difficulties of the story, its inconsistencies and improbabilities, are shown to be 
explicable by regarding it as the plot of a play in which the incidents are made to fit 
the exigencies of the stage. 


But myth, again, is the invariable accompaniment of ritual and it would appear as if 
they normally develop together from the simplest beginnings. This would suggest 
that we must reduce the story to its lowest factors before we begin to look for its 

Again, both custom and myth are extremely tenacious of life, but not of form. The 
action persists but its reference and details may be completely changed. The incident 
remains but the motive is entirely new. Even apparently insignificant details may be 
retained with an entirely new explanation for their presence foisted into the story. 

Tylor's work, mentioned above, is the classical authority on this point. Indeed he 
coined the technical term "survival" to designate this constantly recurring 
phenomenon. In our own case, therefore, we may confidently look for customs and 
stories that are ancient, of unknown antiquity, but that have developed and grown, 
quite possibly out of all knowledge of their originals, unless one is able to produce 
intermediate stages. 

Then we may apply the comparative method that has proved so fruitful in similar 
investigations in other fields. This brings us to a set of facts that have hardly even 
been alluded to by most writers on this subject - the wide variations in the Legend 
itself. Brother Race, for instance, in the paper above referred to, has critically 
examined the version current in British Freemasonry; Brother Williamson deals with 
that familiar to American Masons. The difficulties of the one do not exist in the 
other, and criticism applied to the other might be entirely irrelevant to the former. 
And there are again other variations even yet of authority in Europe, while there are 
many traces of yet others in the disjecta membra of "sources," especially in the mass 
of references, allusions, documents and illicit publications dating from the eighteenth 
century. A comparison of these would seem to point to some extremely interesting 
and important conclusions. 

One may note some of the more salient of these. It would appear for instance that the 
original story, as it emerged into the historical period, that is, the Grand Lodge era, 
knew nothing of any pursuit or punishment of criminals. In fact a whole class of 
degrees were invented from 1750 on, (the "Ecossais" and "Kadosh" degrees) to 
supply this lack. Another is that the motive for the crime was very uncertain. 
Jealousy on the part of K.S. over Baltis, Queen of Sheba, appears in one wild account 
where the wise king is made to play a part like that of his father's dealings with Uriah 
the Hittite. In others, professional jealousy appears as the motive. Again, in certain 
early French work it is said that the Hebrew name of God was the original WORD, 
but that it was feared that it might have become known, and so "les autres maitres," 
not K.S., on discovering the body, "current opportun de le changer, et substituerent a 
Jehova le mot. ..." 

When we get through this process of cancelling out the variations and taking what 
underlies all versions we have left a very simple and indefinite, but highly significant, 

story which might thus be told. Someone was killed by someone else, who was 
assisted by two others; fifteen people had something to do with the affair; the body 
was hidden; and a green branch was connected with its discovery. Neither time, 
place, nor occasion is certain, any more than the motive and identity of the actors. To 
which may be added the special Masonic element, that this occurred during the 
erection of some vast and important building. Other minor details are constant. 

There is a hill top, and a reference to the Cardinal Points for example. This bare 
skeleton of a plot is obviously connected with such stories as that of the Apprentice 
Pillar at Rosslyn, and the Apprentice's Window at Lincoln, no less than with similar 
stories from Germany and the remarkable and complex tale that is half told in 
Perdiguier's Livre du Compagnonage of the death of Maitre Jacques at the hands of 
the disciples of Maitre Soulise - and it is at the same time practically identical with 
the myths of "mystery" ritual literally the world over. Such plots are not first public 
and then by some lapse of memory covered by the veil of secrecy, but whenever 
found to be public property can generally be shown to have been once secret. These 
are several normal ways in which a mystery becomes public, but none (excepting of 
course deliberate invention) by which what is public becomes a mystery. 


How came our legend to have such close analogies with the Miracle Plays? The 
Mystery is always dramatic, indeed it is not too rash to suppose that the origin of all 
drama, as of dancing, is to be found in primitive mystery ritual. The origin of the 
Oriental theatre has not, so far as the present writer is aware, yet been investigated but 
that of the Greeks has, and it is practically certain that it had its origin directly in the 
Mysteries of Dionysus. A comparison of the Greek tragedies remaining shows under 
all the variety and "humanity" of the general aspect an extraordinary coincidence in 
the essentials of the plots. In all of them can be found an Agon, a Pathos, a 
Messenger, a Threnos, an Anagnorisis, a Peripeteia, and a Theophany. In some of the 
plays one or other of these elements may be reduced to the barest minimum yet a 
distinct trace will persist; the order may vary but the cycle remains. Now translate 
these terms into ordinary English and apply them to our Legend. There is an Agon or 
struggle; a Pathos, or suffering; a Messenger; a Threnos, or lamentation; an 
Anagnorisis, or discover, and finally a Peripeteia, or reversal of feeling, a change 
from darkness to light, from sorrow to joy, and even a sort of pale reflection of a 
Theophany, or revelation of the Divinity. What happened in Athens was that a 
Mystery became public, and we have the Greek plays as a result. But there were 

hundreds of other mysteries of which we do not even definitely know the existence, 
and which were never public. But to go further into this would lead us altogether too 
far afield. 

I reecho Brother Williamson's lament as to the difficulty of gaining access to original 
sources of information. I have been unable so far to do more than barely touch this 
field of inquiry. But I feel convinced that here lies a possibility of explaining, by 
means of the laws of the normal development of religious and semi-religious ideas 
and institutions, the things that are so puzzling in our ancient Fraternity. In any case 
it was too much to believe that such at Legend, coupled with such a Ritual, so closely 
paralleling those of mystery rites everywhere and in every age, could have been 
devised by eighteenth century scholars, or even evolved by sixteenth century 


Bro. David E. W. Williamson, Reno, Nevada, who has been at work this past year 
upon a book concerning the Third Degree, had opportunity to read Bro. Meekren's 
manuscript printed above and as a result of his interest in the same wrote YE 
EDITOR a long letter in which occurred a paragraph good to read as a codicil to Bro. 
Meekren's brilliant paper. If this communication is printed here instead of in the 
Correspondence Department it is in order to render it all the more useful to those who 
are interested in the subject, and not in any sense as a supplement to the above article. 

"Brother Meekren has followed the line of reasoning that I find in the Revised 
Mackey on the 'Origin of the Third Degree.' The chapter in the History is from the 
pen of Bro. Clegg, himself, I imagine, because it carries a vein of thought that he has 
touched upon in several letters to me. But Bro. Meekren adds much from a deep 
store of classic reading and reaches several conclusions under his various heads that 
are distinctively original and suggestive. As to "ab" and its construct forms of "abi" 
and "abiv" he is quite right, I think, in his view, but a clincher would be to have the 
original of Josephus looked up to see what Josephus really wrote at the point 
translated by Whiston: "Antiochus to Zeuxis His Father." Zeuxis was the 

commanding general of his forces and not his father in fact. My Bagger's Septuagint 
is not the last word in scholarship, of course, but according to it "Chiram ton patera 
mou" would be translated "Hiram, who belonged to my father," which 1 believe is the 
consensus of scholars on this point. In a footnote, the editor (not named) says that 
according to the Alexandrine MS. it might mean "Chiram, my son" or even "Chiram, 
my servant." But every city Arabian vagabond and huckster in Cairo, according to 
Col. Green and many fugitive writings, has the expression "abuya" in his mouth all 
day long, addressed to anybody whom he seeks to induce to buy his wares. And 
"abuya" means "my father" and nothing else. 

"I think I shall have to unload all these "abi" facts upon you in a page or so one of 
these days, if you think anybody would care to read them. You see I'm sceptical 
about the Craft being interested in such matters as derivation and possible meaning of 
words and feel that you have made THE BUILDER interesting and educational by 
eliminating the dead wood. Except to those whose tastes lie in a philological 
direction, derivations are certainly "dead wood" and besides they require such painful 
accuracy to be anything more than mere guesses." 

David E. W. Williamson, Nevada. 

o — 



I sat one day beside the flowing river 
And watched it as it glided on its way, 

So smooth and placid in its onward motion 

Avoiding all delay. 

Within its bosom was a moving purpose, 

A longing wish to reach the mighty sea, 

And all its strength it gave to that one purpose 
But yet how noiselessly. 

And I have learned that somewhere in the distance 
Beyond the mountain and the spreading lea, 

Still moving in that calm majestic sweetness, 

The river found the sea. 

— o 

To become an able man in any profession, there are three things necessary - nature, 
study and practice. - Aristotle. 

o — 

Memorials to Great Men Who Were Masons 


By Bro. GEO. W. BAIRD, P.G.M., District of Columbia 

REAR ADMIRAL, WINFIELD SCOTT SCHLEY, U. S. N., "the hero of Santiago,” 
was the only man ever made a Mason at sight in the District of Columbia. After 
becoming a member of Benjamin B. French Lodge in 18953, he found himself so 
fascinated with Freemasonry that he took all of his degrees one after another as 
rapidly as he could. I think that Freemasonry had a great deal to do with his thought 
and feelings from that time until his death, and I am anxious to have it known that one 
who made such a place for himself in our national annals found so much worth in our 
Craft during the last years of his life. 

Winfield Scott Schley was born in Maryland in 1849 and received his early education 
in Frederick of that state. He was appointed a cadet midshipman in our navy in 1856 
and was graduated a midshipman in 1860. 

He was ordered to the Steam Frigate Niagara of the East India squadron and soon was 
off on a cruise, during which time he was promoted to past midshipman. 

The Niagara was ordered home very hurriedly at the time of the Civil War but its 
officers and men were in ignorance of the extent of the calamity which had befallen 
the nation until the vessel reached Cape Town, at which time the commanding officer 
learned that civil war was actually under way. 

The voyage home was made partly under sail and partly under steam as the ship did 
not carry coal enough for the entire distance. It was thought that each and every man 
should go with his state but it was not known how many states had seceded until the 
Niagara reached Boston when an officer came on board at which time the crew was 
mustered and the statement made that every officer must take an additional oath of 
allegiance. Those who refused or asked time to consider were placed under arrest 
with the exception of Schley himself who was allowed forty-eight hours in which to 

communicate with his people. Before that time had expired he learned that Maryland 
had not seceded, upon which he promptly took the oath. 

He was shortly afterward promoted to the rank of Master and ordered to the old 
sailing Frigate Potomac stationed at Ship Island in Mississippi Sound. This duty was 
monotonous and irksome, and officers and men tried to escape from it, but Schley did 
not have long to wait before receiving his first command. He was put in charge of one 
of the famous ninety day "gunboats" called the Winona. 

When Captain Farragut arrived to assemble his fleet at the bar of the Mississippi 
River, he found it necessary to jettison part of the cargo of the Colorado and of the 
Pensacola in an effort to get them through the shallow water. He succeeded in getting 
the Pensacola over but not the Colorado. Schley's own little ship was particularly 
useful in these maneuvers. Several Confederate gunboats (the Ivy, the Manassas, etc.) 
not infrequently came within range while reconnoitering but never lingered very long 
after a shot was fired. 

On one occasion Farragut sent Schley up to the head of the passes for observation and 
very soon heard heavy firing. He signalled Schley to cease firing and return but that 
officer did not heed his orders. The signal was repeated again and again but still 
Schley did not heed it. After the firing had ceased and the Winona returned, Farragut 
sent up a signal, "Commanding Officer, come aboard." Schley remarked afterwards in 
telling the story that he confidently expected a court-martial. Captain Farragut met 
him on the quarterdeck of the Hartford and administered a severe reprimand during 
which time Schley kept glancing nervously at the yardarm because he was afraid he 
might be hanged there. He said he never felt so mean or ashamed in-his whole life. 
When Farragut had finished his reprimand, he exclaimed, "Now, young man, come 
into the cabin with me, I have something more to say!" 

Schley followed him into the cabin. As soon as the door was closed, Farragut 
produced a bottle of sherry and two glasses, held up a glass of wine, and exclaimed: 
"Young man, if I commanded a gunboat and got into a mixup with the enemy, and 
was getting the better of him, I'll be d - d if I'd see a signal either." 

Schley was in charge of the Winona at the Port Huron, Louisiana, engagement, and in 
most of the engagements which took place about Port Hudson, Grand Gulf, Baton 
Rouge and the Chalmette Batteries: he helped run the Mississippi River forts, and he 
was at the fall of New Orleans. 

After the Civil War was ended Commander Schley served at the Naval Academy as 
instructor in Spanish, in which language he was very proficient. Leaving there he 
made a cruise in the Pacific in the famous Wateree, a vessel that was afterward 
carried up by a tidal wave and left stranded on the sands of Africa three-quarters of a 
mile from the water. 

He again returned to the Naval Academy and then once again made another Pacific 
cruise, this time in the sloop of war Benicia. Later he commanded the Essex. Then he 
became lighthouse inspector and later was chief of the Bureau of Equipment of the 
Department of the Navy. 

After that he became commanded of the Cruiser Baltimore. The members of his crew 
got into a fight with the crew of a Chilean cruiser and became thereby forced into 
diplomatic differences with the officials of that republic. In the give and take of this 
diplomatic quarrel, he acquitted himself well. Later he became commander of the 
battleship New York, and later still assumed chairmanship of the lighthouse board. 

When the Spanish American War broke out, he was placed in command of the flying 
squadron, his flagship being the Brooklyn. The West Indies squadron was 
commanded by an estimable officer who had broken down in health and who was 
succeeded temporarily by a captain who was a grade in rank below Schley (now a 
commodore) and to whom for some reason the Navy Department had given the 
temporary rank of rear admiral. Newspapers reported the Spanish squadron under 
Cervera as enroute to the United States and it was known that there were guns in that 
Spanish fleet capable of very long range. Dailies along the Atlantic Coast frightened 
cities very much so that many feared that Cervera might be planning to destroy them. 
Commodore Schley assembled his flying squadron at the mouth of the Chesapeake, 

which was central and there stayed in readiness for an attack the moment the Span;sh 
Fleet might be reported. That fleet was discovered in the region of Martinique in 
waters controlled by the West Indies squadron. Upon sailing for those waters, 
Commodore Schley found himself, when in action, working under an officer above 
whom he himself ranked. Neither that officer nor Schley quarreled or uttered any 
complaints but the general public became much agitated and to this day men argue as 
to whom the honors of that naval encounter should go. 

Admiral Schley was a very temperate man and always careful of his health. He 
avoided drugs, depended largely on nature to relieve his ailments, enjoyed life and 
was seldom ill. Death came suddenly as he had always wished and was due to a 
cerebral hemmorhage while walking along the streets of New York City. Bystanders 
who lifted the well dressed and slender form from the sidewalk were astonished to 
discover it to be the body of the famous Winfield Scott SChley. He was buried with 
military and Masonic honors in the National Cemetery at Arlington. Over his grave 
was erected the beautiful granite memorial shown in the accompanying illustration. 

— o — 





THE ORIGIN OF MODERN Freemasonry has been traced by means of documents 
and other historical records to guilds of builders in the Middle Ages. These guilds in 
turn were derived from yet earlier forms of organized endeavour (as has already been 
noted in the chapter on the Cathedral Builders) therefore Masonic historians have 
found it necessary to try to push their way back behind them in an attempt to learn 
how they came into existence. Nearly all these historians have fastened their attention 
on the Roman collegia (plural form of collegium) as furnishing the most probable 
ancestry for the guilds from which Freemasonry sprang, therefore it is necessary for a 
Masonic student to know something about those societies of ancient Rome. 

A collegium was an association of persons, never less than three, for some chosen 
object, usually of a trade, social, or religious character, organized according to law. It 
had its own regulations and usually its own meeting place. In the majority of cases 
these collegia were dealt with by law as having what is known in lawyer parlance as 
"a legal personality," that is to say, they could own property and they could be held 
accountable through their officials for their acts. The collegiate organizations reached 
their perfection and became most popular in Rome, therefore they are generally 
known as Roman collegia, but they were also popular in many other countries as well. 


The great majority of Greek Collegia were organized about the worship of some god 
or hero. Religion was a public activity controlled by the state and consequently was 
formal in its character; many men and women, feeling the need for something more 
emotional, organized themselves into cults for the private worship of their favourite 
gods, and these organizations were often collegiate in form. It is believed that the 
famous Orphic mysteries, so often described by Masonic writers, were begun in this 
manner. Collegia of worshippers of Bacchus existed in the second century; there is a 
record of such a collegium dated 186 B.C. These and other Greek collegia were called 
by various names, thiassoi, hetairai, etc. 

Political activity among the Greeks sometimes assumed the collegiate form, 
especially among the lower classes and among colonies of resident aliens, the latter of 

whom usually settled at or near some seaport. There were political collegia at Athens 
in the time of Pericles, and they caused much trouble. In 413 B.C. a group of them 
conspired to overthrow the democratic government. Such Greek associations, 
however, were not very numerous or powerful, and never reached anything like the 
state of development as that attained in Rome. 

Collegia became more or less common in Egypt in the first century B.C., especially 
among the worshippers of Isis. Apuleius mentions one such organization under date 
of 79 B.C., and there is reason to believe that they had existed much earlier. In many 
cases they took the form of burial clubs, about which more anon. Records of the 
existence of such associations in the famous region of the Fayum have been found, 
bearing date of 67 B.C. In Asia Minor, also, traces of collegia have been unearthed, 
and it is believed that Thyatira had a larger number than any other city in Asia; its 
college of smiths became known throughout the world. 


Among the Romans collegiate associations were so old that legend attributed their 
founding to Numa, the second of the traditional Roman kings, and there is a mention 
of collegia in the Twelve Tables. These organizations flourished unhampered until 
after the beginning of the first century B.C., during which time some opposition 
began to develop among Roman law makers. In 64 B.C. they were forbidden for a 
while, with the exception of a few of a religious character, but in 58 a Clodian law 
once again permitted them. This law was set aside only two years afterwards. Julius 
Caesar in his turn forbade them all, except Jewish associations of worship, on the 
ground that they dabbled too much in politics. When Augustus became emperor he 
espoused the cause of the collegia and caused to be adopted an imperial statute that 
came to stand as the foundation of all jurisprudence having to do with them and with 
similar organizations. The Emperor Marcus Aurelius was the greatest friend the 
collegia ever had. 

Except for these general statutes the collegia were left very much to themselves until 
Nero became emperor, when he caused to be adopted a series of regulations 

controlling the associations in Italian towns. These regulations were extended to 
include provincial towns by Trajan, and from his regime until the end one emperor 
after another assumed such increasing control of the collegia that there came a time 
when they were merely cogs in the great machinery of state. Membership was made 
hereditary; transfer of a man from one collegium to another was forbidden; and 
freedom to work or not to work was everywhere denied. Industry became in effect a 
state controlled monopoly, and workmen were as restricted as soldiers in an army. 
The imperial system in its last centuries was supported by the power it extorted from 
the collegia, so that the organizations of trades, the organizations of politics, and the 
organizations of military forces became three great pillars underneath the empire. 

In spite of the great mass of regulations and restrictive laws, and of the severe 
penalties hedging them all about, a great many collegia came into existence under 
conditions and for purposes that violated the statutes. These were known as collegia 
illicits, and gave the officials just such trouble as bootleggers give nowadays. Some 
of these unlawful associations were of a religious character, others were hatching 
places for political intrigues. When apprehended they were severely dealt with 
through the person of their president, who was compelled to pay a heavy fine or else 
go to jail. 

It is amazing to discover how many collegia there were. More than twenty-five 
hundred inscriptions are in existence, and these have emanated from some four 
hundred and seventy-five towns and villages of the empire. In the city of Rome itself 
more than eighty different trades were organized, and it is believed that if the 
memorials were more complete the number would be considerably increased. It is a 
great misfortune that we are so dependent on inscriptions and similar records, because 
time has not dealt kindly with such things, but this is the case and because the classic 
writers almost always scorned to speak of them owing to their plebeian character. 

Like our own literary historians the old Latin writers loved to tell about lords and 
ladies and other notables, their fortunes, their intrigues, and their wars: the 
numberless masses of common folk lay outside their range of vision. An attempt to 
discover what the historians of the Roman Empire have had to say about the collegia 
will bring this home to a man; in all the histories that I was able to consult I did not 
find any reference worth reading except in one or two of the thick volumes of Duruy, 
the Frenchman. Gibbon raises his eyebrows; Ferrers has nothing to say; Mommsen 
forgets all about it, though in 1870 he published a tome in Latin on the matter, which, 

so far as one may discover, has never been translated into English; and so it goes. 
One is driven back on the archaeologists. 

A great many collegia were organized solely for the purpose of guaranteeing a 
member a decent sepulture; they were known as teuinorum collegia, or burial clubs. 
Each club of this kind built or leased a hall, and held regular meetings upon which 
occasions poems were read about the deceased, or a feast was held to commemorate a 
brother on his birthday anniversary. Each of these pathetic little societies owned, or 
had access to, a columbarium. A columbarium, God save the mark, was a kind of 
nickname, and meant literally dovecote, which was a name suggested by the fact that 
it so much resembled the little buildings in which aristocrats housed their doves. In a 
dark room, half underground, were galleries of niches, each large enough to contain 
an urn; every member of the collegium was entitled to his niche and his urn, and there 
were provisions for a vase of flowers, perhaps, or even an inscription. 

Death was a thing of horror to the Roman, especially if he had the misfortune to be 
poor, because his creeds taught him that a man illy buried would turn out an unhappy 
ghost, or even would wander unhoused about the winds, a forlorn and shivering spirit 
in an agony of loneliness. Accordingly, every man strained his resources to see to it 
that his own soul was protected against such a fate. The rich could build their own 
monuments - every Roman highway of any importance was lined by such things - but 
the slaves and the poor were hard put to stave off neglect after death. They resorted 
to the expedient of pooling their resources, and the burial club was the result. 

It is impossible for us modems to realize how much such a thing meant to a Roman 
with little or no means. The public custom of disposing of the uncared for dead was 
repellent beyond description. Great pits were kept half open near the centers of 
population and into these, without any ceremony, the corpses of the poor were 
dumped. To escape such a horror a man was willing to make almost any sacrifice. 

Owing to this feeling about burial the Romans were always patient with any attempt 
at securing decorous funeral lites, therefore the collegia having such matters in charge 
were dealt with patiently and often with lenience. It is supposed by such authorities 

as Sir William Ramsey that many of the early Christian churches were first organized 
as burial clubs in order to escape the wrath of the officials, especially when all private 
religious associations were under the ban, as happened several times. It is believed 
by some that the early church was often persecuted, not because of the theological 
doctrines it taught, but because officialdom deemed associations of private persons a 
menace to the state. 

The great majority of collegia came into existence for more mundane purposes. 
Almost every profession, art, and trade had its own organization made in due form, 
and according to imperial statute. Sometimes the division of function among these 
crafts was carried to an extreme as when the garbage collectors had their own 
collegium, the slipper makers theirs, the vendors of fish theirs, the wig makers theirs, 
etc. The oldest known inscription refers to a collegium of cooks, 200 B.C. It has been 
alleged by many Masonic writers that collegia of masons, or builders and architects, 
occupied a distinctive place and enjoyed special honours and privileges. It is true that 
Cicero remarks of the honourableness of architecture, and that a few other of the 
Latins mention that calling as having a peculiar usefulness, but other than this I have 
never been able to discover any grounds for the assertions so freely made by our own 
historians, though I have searched with loving care, seeing that I have wished to find 
such evidence. 

There were no collegia in Roman Africa, and there were not many in the Eastern 
Empire, but elsewhere they were thickly scattered through Roman civilization. Every 
regiment of soldiers carried with it its own collegia of engineers, carpenters, and such 
craftsmen, and, as Coote remarks, "it was as easy to imagine a Roman without a city 
as to conceive his existence without collegia." 


Each collegium aspired to control or own a hall or meeting place, which it called 
schola, or in some cases, curia. For officials it had a kind of president called by 
different names, magistri, curitarious, quinquennales, perfecti praesides, and so on. 
Decuriones were a kind of warden, and there were factors or quaestors to manage the 

business affairs. Each society had its own laws, called lex college, and its house rules 
or by-laws, and these regulations were based, as already explained, on the imperial 
statutes. Fees and dues went into a common chest, called the area. It has been 
alleged by some writers that the funds thus accumulated were used for charitable 
purposes but the best informed archaeologists dissent from this opinion, and say that 
the income was employed to defray necessary expenses for the upkeep of 
headquarters, and for memorial banquets. Oftentimes some well-to-do member or 
friend left behind a legacy, usually with the direction that it be used for memorial 
banquets, but sometimes for the benefits of the membership as a whole. Most 
collegia besought the graces of a patron, often a woman, who, in return for signal 
honours, helped defray the expenses of the little group. It is supposed by a few 
chroniclers that these patrons, who often belonged to the upper classes, were more or 
less useful in controlling the activities of the collegia in the interests of the established 

The social system of Rome, with its semi-caste form, was reflected inside the 
collegium where the differences of rank were anxiously observed, and the member 
from some noble house always received special honours. Slaves were often admitted, 
if they came with the consent of their masters, and there were many freedmen, who 
were in many cases wealthy men. For the most part, the technical organization of the 
body, with its officials, its ranks, and its parish outlines, was modelled on the lay-out 
of the typical Roman city which was to a Roman the ne plus ultra of political 


To the student of the evolution of Freemasonry from its first crude traces until its 
present state of affluence and power, the story of the collegia is of considerable 
importance. The enthusiastic notion that those ancient associations were Masonic 
lodges in the literal sense, and that through them our Fraternity as it now exists can 
trace its history back to 1000 B.C. or beyond, must be abandoned except in a sense so 
broad as almost to rob the idea of any meaning at all. Nevertheless the collegiate 
organization may justly be considered as one item in a long chain of general as 
sociational development, the last link of which is our modem Fraternity. 

There are three or four theories which hold that one may trace a certain tenuous 
continuity between the Roman collegia and modem Freemasonry. 

One of these is the Dionysiac Artificers theory. This hypothesis was given the shape 
with which we are now familiar by Hyppolito Joseph Da Costa in his Sketch for the 
History of the Dionysian Artificers (published complete in instalment form in The 
Montana Mason beginning with November, 1921), and he was followed, and his 
arguments repeated, by The History of Freemasonry, drawn from authentic source of 
information; with an account of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, from its Institution in 
1736 to the present time, compiled from the Records; and an Appendix of Original 
Papers, a famous old volume long attributed to Alexander Lawrie but now generally 
believed to have been written by Sir David Brewster. The essence of this theory is 
that these Artificers were employed - lodges of them, that is - in the building of King 
Solomon's Temple, and that they preserved the secrets of architecture until at last they 
transmitted them to such of the Roman collegia as practised that art. 

At this juncture the equally well known Comacine theory comes in. According to this 
reading of the matter, as we may learn from Cathedral Builders, by "Leader Scott," 
and from Brother Ravenscroff s codicils to the same in his Comacines - Their 
Predecessors and Their Successors, a few of the Roman builders' collegia (collegia 
fabrorum) took refuge from the Barbarian invasions on or near Lake Como in 
Northern Italy and there kept alive a knowledge of building until such time as 
conditions had stabilized themselves and Europe had become ready for another 
civilization. When the barbarian peoples began to build their own cities and to lay 
out their highways these Comacini, so the theory has it, went here and there to teach 
the people the arts of building. They established schools, and acted as missionaries in 
general throughout the various countries of Europe, England included, all of which 
will be described in more adequate manner in a chapter to come. 

The third of the theories that would connect the collegia with early Masonic guilds is 
that which Gould elaborates at some length in the first volume of his History, but 
without committing himself one way or the other. According to this theory, collegia 
entered Britain with the Roman army of conquest and were responsible for the cities, 

highways, dikes and churches, some remains of which are still in existence. When the 
Angles, Saxons and Danes made an end of the Roman civilization in the islands, the 
collegia continued to exist among them in a somewhat changed form, known as 
guilds. Among these guilds were those devoted to building and its allied arts, and out 
of these guilds there emerged in time those organizations of Masons who gave us 
Freemasonry. Some of the greatest historians in the world deny all this in toto - 
Freeman among them - while others accept it. A layman must make up his mind to 
suit himself. 

Still another theory is that which connects the medieval guilds of Europe with the 
collegia that lingered late in and about Constantinople, or, as it was called, 
Byzantium. It is supposed that as these organizations of Byzantine builders came 
more and more into demand they moved gradually across Italy and on up into central 
Europe where they served as the seed out of which came the Teutonic guilds. 
According to the theory, it was from these Teutonic guilds that the Masonic guilds of 
England came, and it was out of the English guilds that Freemasonry emerged. 

Until such time as more evidence is forthcoming these, and other theories that could 
be described if space permitted, will all hang more or less in the air. For my own part 
I do not accept any of them as proved. None of them have a sufficient bottom of 
known facts. It appears to me that we should hold judgment in suspense. 

Nevertheless and in spite of this uncertainty, the collegia will ever continue to be of 
importance to us Masons because they give us one of the best examples in the world 
of how and why it is that such a thing as Freemasonry grows up out of human nature. 
In the days of the Roman Empire life became hard and it grew complex, so that the 
individual found himself helpless to battle the world alone. He discovered that if he 
would combine his own puny individual forces with the resources of his neighbours 
and friends that what he alone could not do he might do through cooperation. 
Through pooling their money, their knowledge, their influence, and their good will 
the dim multitudes of common people learned to hold their own in a great hard world 

It is so today. The lodge is a means whereby the solitary individual may escape from 
his helplessness by linking his own life onto the lives of his fellows. In its utmost 
essence that is what Freemasonry does. It goes down into the depths of a man's 
nature until it finds what is most permanent and universal in him and links that onto 
the inmost nature of many others. Held together by such a Mystic Tie brethren work 
and live together and they who might in our large centers lead lonely lives as 
strangers or even as enemies are able to rescue from the welter of modern life the 
sweet amenities of friendship, brotherly love, relief, mutual tolerance, and kindliness. 
What the collegium was to the men of ancient Rome, the Masonic lodge is to men of 


Livy, Metamorphosis, XI, 30. Kennedy, St. Paul and the Mystery Religions, 72, etc. 
Poland, History of the Greeks. Waltzing, Historical Studies of the Professional 
Corporations of the Romans. Pauly, Realencyclopadie, article by Komemann on 
Collegium. Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible, vol. V, 132. A Companion to Latin 
Studies, see. 202. Find complete Latin bibliography in sec. 563. Hasting, 
Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. VI, 218. Hatch, The Organization of Early 
Christian Churches. Encyclopedia Britannica, eleventh edition, vol VI, 564. 
Mommsen, De Collegiis et Sodalitiis Romanorum Kiliae, 1870. Grote, History of 
Greece, vol. V, Greenidge, Handbook of Greek Constitutional History, 208 ff. Davis, 
The Influence of Wealth in Imperial Rome, section on Gilds. Pliny, Epistle X, 97, 98. 
Abbott, The Common People of Ancient Rome, 205. Corpus Inscriptionum 
Latinarum, XI, 5047; V, 7906; 111, 953; VIII, 14683; III, 3583; XIV, 2112; XIV, 326. 
Friedlander, Roman Life and Manners, I, 146. Fowler, The Religious Experience of 
the Roman People, eh. beginning p. 270. Barnes, Early Church in the Light of the 
Monuments, 53. De Rossi, Roma Soterranea, 58. Bulletino di Arch. Crist. Ramsey, 
The Church in the Roman Empire, 213. Hatch, Bampton Lectures, 152. Le Blant, 
Actes, 282. Dill, Roman Life From Nero to Marcus Aurelius. Plutarch, Numa. 

Duruy, History of Rome, several chapters; consult index. Cobern, The New 
Archaeological Discoveries and the New Testament. Pelham, Essays on Roman 
History, 701 ff. Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, XI, 170. Scott, The Cathedral Builders, 
book II, eh. 3. Clegg, Mackey's History of Freemasonry, eh. 46 ff. Gould, The History 
of Freemasonry, vol. I, 36. See bibliographical notes in entire chapter. Coote, The 
Romans of Britain. Fort, Early History and Antiquities of Masonry. Hope, Historical 
Essay on Architecture. Newton, The Builders, part I, eh 5. Armitage, A Short 

Masonic History, vol I ch 7. Gould, The Concise History of Freemasonry, (Crowe's 
Revision), 10. Ward, Freemasonry and the Ancient Gods, part 1, ch. 17. Spence, 
Encyclopedia of Occultism, article on Freemasonry. Corpus Juris Civilis, Dig. 

XL VII, 22. Brown, From Schola to Cathedral. 

Mackey's Encyclopedia - (Revised Edition): 

Ancient Mysteries, 497; Builder, 123; Collegium, 158. Comacine Masters, 161; 
Egyptian Mysteries, 232; Freemasons of the Church, 150; Gilds, 296; Initiations of 
the Egyptian Priests, 234; Isis, 358; Mysteries of Osiris, 540; Oath of the Gild, 524; 
Orphic Mysteries, 539; Osiris, 540; Roman Colleges of Artificers, 630; Stone-Masons 
of the Middle Ages, 718. 


Vol. Ill, 1917. - Masonic History - Suggestions for Research, p.204; The Cathedral 
Builders, p. 380. 

Vol. IV, 1918. - The Comacines, p. 63. 

Vol. VI, 1920. - A Bird's-Eye View of Masonic History, 236 

Vol. VII, 1921. - Whence Came Freemasonry, p. 90. 

Vol. VIII, 1922. - A Mediating Theory, p. 318. 

According to our usual custom Study Club articles will be discontinued for July and 
August during which season nearly all Study Clubs discontinue their meetings. The 
series will be resumed in THE BUILDER for September with an article on "The 
Comacine Masters," and that will be followed by others in due order until a more or 
less complete history of the Craft will have been published. 

— o — 



AN ESTIMABLE Masonic scribe has recently published an article under the caption, 
"Do We Want the Shrine?" The burden of his argument is that the Shrine is a kind of 
novel experiment in which lurks a deal of danger for Freemasonry and it is high time 
Craftsmen were looking into the matter. The unfortunate thing about this writer, so 
far as the present subject is concerned, is that he is some fifty years too late. 

The Shrine is not an experiment, blushing with timidity, but a veteran among 
fraternities with a half century of achievement behind it. It built its first temple in 
New York City in 1872, which is fifty-one years ago. It elected Pro. Walter M. 
Fleming its first Imperial Potentate in New York in June, 1876, and on the same date 
held the first meeting of its Imperial Council, subsequent to which time the Council 
has been in session some forty-seven times. Since Mecca Temple was organized 
(1872) the Shrine has chartered more than one hundred and fifty temples, many of 
which have buildings of their own that are as imposing as they are unique. Its 
membership now runs close to five hundred thousand and every one of these is either 
a Knight Templar or a Scottish Rite Mason. It is too late to ask if we want the Shrine. 

About one-fifth of the total Masonic membership of this country have voted to make 
it a reality. 

It is this fact of the Masonic character of its personnel that raises the problems which 
the above mentioned writer has discussed, because the profane world, knowing of the 
intimacy between the Shrine and Masonic bodies, accept the Shrine as being itself a 
Masonic organization and therefore hold Freemasonry responsible for all its doings. 
With this opinion that the Shrine is an integral part of the Masonic family of rites and 
bodies a great many Masons appear to agree, for they accept it into their circles on the 
same terms as organizations known as strictly Masonic. They devote departments to it 
in Masonic periodicals; they incorporate its story in their histories of the Order; and 
they invite it to house itself in their own buldings, as witness the great new temple 
now building in Detroit where the Shrine is to have headquarter facilities on a par 
with Blue Lodges, Chapters, the Consistory, etc., etc. What is still more important, 
Shrine representatives are frequently permitted to solicit their membership directly 
from among Masons, and often while Masonic bodies are at work, as at Scottish Rite 
reunions. Some may be quite willing to accept the Shrine frankly as being as much a 
Masonic body as a lodge or a chapter; others may refuse to admit that it is more than 
an auxiliary; in either case the fact remains that the Shrine and Masonic bodies 
strictly so called are living and working on terms of closest intimacy, so that, 
whatever be the formal status of the Shrine, its welfare and the general welfare of the 
Craft must necessarily, and to a certain extent, go hand in hand. 

Some of the problems that have arisen from this intimacy have been pretty generally 
discussed, often with anxious care, and some times in Grand Lodge. The habit of 
soliciting members, so frankly referred to by Brother McCandless in his article in this 
issue, grates on the sensibility of many Blue Lodge Masons who look upon 
solicitation in any form as unmasonic. These same brethren dislike very much to see 
men seek admittance to a Blue Lodge merely as a step looking toward membership in 
the Shrine. Also they have been shocked on two or three occasions by what one 
Grand Lodge spokesman described as "mad doings." Furthermore, many of these 
same brethren feel that in Masonry there is an almost solemn dignity, like that which 
one finds in all sincere religion, and that this dignity does not appear to them to 
comport well with a parade of Masons going down a city street in red fezzes and 
flowing pantaloons. 

There is no attempt to raise such questions here, which are cited merely by way of 
illustration, least of all is there any attempt to answer them. But there is one principle 
that may be mentioned which, if it were always adhered to, would automatically 
dispose of almost all such difficulties. In all Masonic activities whatsoever the strictly 
Masonic work of every Masonic body must have always the right of way; secondary 
and auxiliary activities must always take a second place. This applies not only to the 
Shrine but to all the other playgrounds of Masonry. It is a great evil when a Blue 
Lodge initiation is crowded into the early afternoon in order to free the lodge room 
for a dinner dance, or when it is hurriedly got out of the road in order that an amateur 
orchestra may entertain the crowd. Such doings ARE unmasonic, and should be 
everywhere frowned on. 

Brother McCandless and his colleagues are in the vanguard of those who frown on 
them. All Shriners are brother Masons, and some of the wisest heads of the Craft are 
members of the Imperial Council. They are fully awake to all their problems, and it is 
pretty safe to predict that they will meet them in a spirit that looks only to the high 
ideals of Masonry. One thing is certain. No good will ever come from attempts to set 
one group of Masons into opposition with other groups. We are all members of one 
great family, and our welfare must ever consist in the application of the family spirit 
to all our problems. 

Such problems as may now confront the Shrine are incidental to all great 
organizations, and there is no need to fear lest the wisdom of Masonry fail in solving 
them as they arise from time to time. Meanwhile every Mason can cordially echo the 
sentiments expressed by Brother McCandless in his last paragraph. It is a good thing 
for brethren to enjoy good fellowship; to let God's sunshine into every heart; to 
increase the joy of life; to add to the gaiety of nations. 


A rare old Spanish Dictionary of the eighteenth century described etiquette as "a book 
of ceremonies hid in the king's palace." The words are fragrant as an old wine, are 
they not, and suggest, after the manner of poetry, many more things than they tell. In 

the Old French, from which etiquette is derived, the term was used of the tickets 
given out at court to enable each member of the king's suite to kind the place in line 
properly suited to his rank. This association of courtliness, of kingly mien, and 
elegant deportment, hangs like an aroma about the word still, and conveys to us a hint 
of what sort of thing it is. Good manners accepted and used, and consequently 
transformed into a ceremonial, such a thing is etiquette, and only a boor would make 
light of it. It is to good manners what the written score is to music, and quite as 
necessary, lest the harmony of social intercourse evaporate away. 

Emerson once exclaimed that if manners were lost out of the world, some gentleman 
would rediscover them, because they are necessary to the social life of civilized 
people. The Sage of Concord was little given to forms; indeed, he did more than any 
other man of his generation to dissolve them, but for all that he saw clearly how 
necessary they are. "The charm of fine manners is music and sculpture and picture," 
he remarked on another occasion. A saying similar to this is attributed to an old sage 
of ancient Europe: "Men make laws, women make manners." It is to say that men 
contribute strength; women, beauty; and that charm, address, and courtesy are as 
important as armies and gunpowder. 

Our brethren in England long ago learned how good and beautiful a thing it is for 
Masons to work together in lodge under the inspiration of etiquette. They employ a 
Master of Ceremonies, and ask of each member that he observe the due forms of 
lodge behavior, for they know that "good manners and soft words have brought many 
a difficult thing to pass." Brother Campbell-Everden wrote a very excellent book on 
the subject. 

Operative Masons of the old days have often been described as rude men of calloused 
hands and rough behavior. One may doubt this. The Old Charges have a great deal to 
say about the Points of Fellowship, and Anderson's Constitutions, which is certainly 
an excellent witness, devotes one of its six- sections and a very large amount of space 
to a Mason's behavior in and out of lodge. The book is a reflection, and to a certain 
extent a preservation, of customs grown ancient by 1723, and shows that for many 
generations the brethren had been anxious to subdue their passions, to improve 
themselves in Masonry, and to enjoy the privileges of happy social intercourse. 

It is sometimes hinted that in our own lodges we are not so observant of these graces 
There may be something to this charge. Our national culture is not as rich, as 
complex, or as firmly established as that of the Old World. Our traditions and racial 
tendencies have always tended to make light of etiquette. The Puritans and Pilgrims 
who gave us the key of so much of our social behavior retained a stiff knee and kept 
their hats on. Walt Whitman loved to voice this uncouthness in his poems. "I am no 
dainty, dolce, affetuoso," he cried, "but rough, bearded, and to be wrestled with." 

It may be that something of this spirit lingers in our lodges. We may not make a point 
of addressing the chair in strict decorum because we feel that it betokens servility. It 
may be that we sometimes carry on conversations during initiation ceremonies, and 
enter and leave a lodge room without observing the forms, because we enjoy living in 
a free and easy atmosphere. 

It is more probable that other causes lie behind these lapses. The great majority of 
American men are gentlemen by instinct, and the observation applies especially to 
Masons, who have been elected out of the total citizenship because of their social 
aptitudes. Our lodges are often very large. The official group changes rapidly. Many 
Masons can't attend lodge regularly, and accordingly grow rusty. Also there is a great 
deal of travelling about, not only from town to town but among the various rites, so 
that an individual is often hard put to remember his cues. 

These facts represent conditions, not excuses, and offer a challenge to the governors 
of the Craft. Etiquette is necessary. It belongs to the lex non scripts of Freemasonry, 
laws that are not written but laws all the same. It is minor jurisprudence and quite as 
necessary as that required by the constitutions or enjoined by statutes and by-laws. To 
see a lodge conducted with decorum, so that all its activities carry forward like the 
strains of music, is a delight and a privilege. It is, in a sense, the work of 
Freemasonry, which is evermore building temples in the minds and hearts of men, 
and which requires that there should be "a book of ceremonies hidden away in the 
king's palace." 




THIRTEEN CENTURIES OF OUR ERA, by Lynn Thorndike, Ph. D., Professor of 
History in Western Reserve University. Two volumes, 5 3/4 X 8 1/2, xl-835 and vi- 
1036 pages respectively, published by the Macmillan Company, New York, N. Y. 
Price $10.00. Orders can be placed through the Book Department, National Masonic 
Research Society. 

MAGIC IS SO COMMONLY THOUGHT of as trickery, and science as fact, that to 
many the very title of this work may seem selfcontradictory. If the reader will cast 
aside such a prejudice he can the better do justice to this truly monumental work. 

Whether we agree or disagree with the conclusions of Professor Thorndike there can 
be no question about his prodigious industry and his transparent sincerity. He has 
travelled far afield to peruse at first hand the original manuscripts in their dusty 
treasuries in the Old and New Worlds. Not only does he freely interpret the books and 
manuscripts that he has unearthed in various countries but he is frank when listing 
other works to tell how little he is acquainted with their contents whenever such may 
be the case. It is well for him to do this, for his book (if it had no other value) is a 
remarkable work of reference, containing as it does quotations and comments upon 
information stored hitherto in rare publications in several languages, often hidden 
away where distance, war, and other difficulties have barred the investigator. 

Such a production as this by Professor Thorndike has very much of value to us. 
Ceremonies and rites, rituals and formulas of words and phrases, are all within the 
scope of such an inquiry as his. 

We must admit that from first to last there is no direct discussion of our ancient Craft. 
In fact, only in one place do we find an allusion to the Fraternity, and that, in Vol. I, 
page 183, is by no means important. The author there tells us that the architect as 
described by Vitruvius, at the beginning of the Roman Empire under Julius and 
Augustus Caesar, went about his work without magical procedure. We are told that 
"perhaps permanent building is an honest downright open constructive art where error 
is at once apparent and superstition finds little hold. If so, one wonders how there 
came to be so much mystery about Freemasonry." 

But we may venture to suggest that the Professor does not seem to be acquainted with 
what has appeared in such works as Dr. Mackey's Encyclopaedia, and his History; 
Brother George W. Speth's Builders' Rites' and Ceremonies: H. Clay Trumbull's work 
on the primitive rite of the Blood Covenant; the same author's Threshold Covenant; 
the essays on animal symbolism in William Andrews' Church Treasury, and other 
treatises of this class. Perhaps he purposely excluded such funds of information 
though the peculiar practices of religious congregations and of trade organizations 
would not appear to be foreign in any way to his general inquiry. 

Professor Thorndike's field of study is broad and his labors are of twenty years' 
duration. He deems magic to include all occult arts and sciences, superstitions and 
folk-lore, and that magicians were probably the first to experiment scientifically. 
There are numerous references to our ancient friend and brother, the great Pythagoras. 
Of the latter's esteem for the magical qualities of numbers there is much evidence. 

The Bible, the Apocrypha, and magic have each a chapter of compelling interest, 
followed by equally noteworthy comments upon the literature relating to the Apostles 
and the early Fathers of the Church. 

One is tempted to cite freely. There is, for example, the exposure by Hippolytus of the 
frauds of magicians; the early explanation of the high priest's breastplate; the use of 

phrases to ward off injury or to do harm - an ancient idea not unknown as a supposed 
novelty even in these so-called up-to-date times; such mathematical diversions as 
attempts to square the circle in the year 1010; the lament by Abelard in 1107 on the 
national morals, that "princes were violent, prelates winebibbers, judges mercenary, 
patrons inconstant, the common men flatterers, promise makers false, friends envious, 
and everyone in general ambitious," a regret on things going to the dogs that reads as 
familiarly as many letters to the modem newspaper. 

There is the curious argument recorded that necromancy was once advocated to take 
the place of rhetoric among the seven liberal arts and sciences. Then there is the 
division of the mechanical arts, that, omitting theatrical performances and following 
tile analogy of the seven liberal arts, was planned in the years 1272-1279 to be earth 
culture, food science, medicine, costuming, armor making, architecture, and lousiness 
courses. We read the claim in the first century by Pliny and several later writers that 
boiling drinking water makes it more wholesome, a wise suggestion that was as 
recently as 1856 rejected, though present day practice favors the pmdence of the 
Roman author. There is the Latin writer, Neckam, who tells us that in the days of 
antiquity the liberal arts were the monopoly of free men, the mechanical or adulterine 
arts being others. We note the prayer for promoting the virtues of precious gems or 
amulets. An enjoyably intimate description of people in the year 1230 confirms the 
belief that humanity is singularly the same as ever, at least in prejudices. There is the 
philosopher of the thirteenth century who divides science into theoretical or 
speculative and practical or operative, a choice of some note to us. 

The author is not convinced that every medieval scientist was persecuted by the 
church but he does devote a chapter to Cecco d'Ascoli, an astrologer of some 
learning, who was put to death by the Inquisition. 

Professor Thorndike's closing chapter is so instructive upon the heritage of these 
pioneers of science, and shows so clearly that the tendencies of our times are indebted 
to them and colored by the reflection of their thought, that it might well serve us an 
illuminating beacon for further voyages in these deep waters of knowledge, the 
world's first steps in science. 

Robert I. Clegg. 


Chumaceiro. Sixth Edition. The Bloch Publishing Company, 26 East 22nd Street, 
New York City. Forty-eight pages, bound in paper: thirty- five cents. Obtainable 
through the Book Department, National Masonic Research Society. 

This little book possesses an interest of its own aside from its intrinsic merit as an 
interpretation of Freemasonry, for it was written by a Jewish Rabbi whose interest in 
the Craft was almost equal to his passion for Hebrew lore. His Introduction gives an 
account of Masonic "history" that is very reminiscent of Dr. Oliver, quaint and 
interesting now, and, after a generation of Masonic research, valueless. The greater 
part of the book is divided among three lectures on the Craft Degrees which the 
author was wont to deliver to tiled audiences. 

In the lecture on the E. A. Degree he devotes himself to Boaz and to Jacob's Ladder, 
to the interpretation of which he brings a deal of Rabbinic tradition. He believes that 
the pillar was named Boaz to honor the name of that man famous in Hebrew history 
as one of the ancestors of David and Solomon. 

Similarly, in his lecture on the F. C. portion, he interprets Jachin as having been so 
named to memorialize a hero. In this chapter there is much matter about Shibboleth, 
and the Number Seven. 

The third lecture gives an interpretation of Tubal Cain, and also a long disquisition on 
Hiram Abiff, which name is interpreted as meaning "noblest chief." In connection 
with these paragraphs is printed a remarkable dirge, composed in the Ancient 
ld[ebrew manner, supposed to have been pronounced by Solomon at the death of H. 
A. There is an interpretation of The Lost Word, and there are several paragraphs on 
the Emblems of the Third Degree. 

In this entire volume there are few things that would not now be challenged by 
competent Masonic historians and symbologists but for all that there is a winning 
earnestness about it that will bring its message home to a reader, whether he be a 
Hebraist or not. 


Samuel Oppenheim; being a Reprint from the Publications of the American Jewish 
Historical Society, No. 19, (1910), and sold by The Black Publishing Company, 26 
East 22nd Street, New York City: price thirty- five cents; also by the Book 
Department. National Masonic Research Society. 

This treatise was submitted to The American Jewish Historical Society "as a slight 
contribution to the history of the Jews in this country and as a basis for further work." 
It is well to read it in connection with articles on cognate themes in the Jewish 
Encyclopaedia, in which learned work it should have a place, for it is full of such 
information as an encyclopedia is designed to supply. 

Among the many instructive pages in this book of ninety-four pages is a rapid but 
complete sketch of Moses M. Hays, the greatest, per haps, of all Jewish Masons in 

this land, whose "connection with Masonry probably commenced about 1768 when 
he was appointed Deputy Inspector General of Scottish Rite Masonry for North 
America by Henry Andrew Francken, who had been commissioned by Stephen 
Morin, of Paris, acting under the authority of Frederick II of Prussia, the Grand 
Master of Scottish Rite Masons of Europe and holding jurisdiction over America." 
(Page 7.) Mr. Oppenheim adds a remark: "Why such extraordinary powers were 
granted to Hays, a Jew, is a question remaining to be answered." 

The story, or supposed story, of the manuscript purported to have been found by Bro. 
Nathan H. Gould, of Newport, R. I., in which it is said that in 1656 or 1658 certain 
Jews were given "the degrees of Maconerie" is a famous crux of Masonic scholarship. 
It is well ventilated on page 9 If., and the Masonic student will do well to have the 
account by him for the sake of the data it contains. The author appears to be non- 

"The earliest Presidential Masonic correspondence that exists on record" is a letter 
written by King David's Lodge of Newport, R. I., to George Washington and signed 
by Moses Seixas, as Master, and by Henry Sherburne. The lodge's letter, and 
Washington's gracious reply are both given in full. A great deal is said about Moses 
Seixas, who was Grand Master of Rhode Island, 1802-1809, and a very famous 
Mason in his day. 

Another name illustrious in the annals of Jewish Masonry is Emanuel De La Motta, 
of Charleston, S. C., who was instrumental in establishing a Supreme Council for the 
Northern Jurisdiction in New York in 1813, and who became its head. Isaac Da Costa 
was another famous Jewish Mason in those days, "A Sublime Lodge of Perfection 
was organized by him in Charleston in February, 1783, he being then Deputy 
Inspector General of Masonry under appointment from Moses M. Hays." (Page 76.) 
This is NOT the Da Costa who wrote the famous work on The Dionysian Artificers. 

"The Supreme Council of the 33d Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite 
of Freemasonry, said to be the first Supreme Council known, and superseding all 
previous analogous organizations, being, it is also said, a transformation of the former 

Rite of Perfection or Ancient Accepted Rite, was organized at Charleston, on May 30, 
1801, by John Mitchell, Frederick Dalcho, Emanuel De La Motta, Abraham 
Alexander, Major T. B. Bowen, and Israel Delichen. A list exists of the officers 
composing this Council in 1802, and also of the officers and members of the different 
sections or divisions of the degrees of the Scottish Rite in that year." Of this list 
fourteen are known to have been Jews. "Others in the list, Dr. Frederick Dalcho, Dr. 
Isaac Auld, and John Mitchell, who were claimed to have been Jews, are known not 
to have been of that race.” 

This Frederick Dalcho, it may be added here, was bom in London of a father who had 
attained distinction in the army of Frederick the Great. Dalcho became a physician in 
the British Army stationed at Charleston but later retired to private practice, and later 
still (1814) became a rector in the Episcopalian church. He became very active in all 
grades of Masonry, was made Grand Secretary of the A. & A. S. R., and later Grand 
Commander. Owing to strife and dissension he resigned from all Masonic activity in 

It is not as well known as it should be that the famous Governor Oglethorpe of 
Georgia was a Mason - made in England it is believed - and one of the founders of 
Solomon's Lodge, No. 1, of Savannah, which was organized in 1785. More than once 
he gave official recognition and honors to the Craft. Mr. Oppenheim believes that 
Governor Oglethorpe's very friendly reception of. the Jews in 1733, was due to the 
fact that he and they were Masons. 

Such facts as these, and many more like them, are to be found in this scholarly work. 
All Masonic students, especially those who specialize in Masonic Americana, should 
own it. 

— o — 


THE BUILDER is an open forum for free and fraternal discussion. Each of its 
contributors writes over his own name, and is responsible for his own opinions. 
Believing that a unity of spirit is better than a uniformity of opinion, the Research 
Society, as such, does not champion any one school of Masonic thought as over 
against another, but offers to all alike a medium for fellowship and instruction, 
leaving each to stand or fall by its own merits. 

The Question Box and Correspondence Column are open to all members of the 
Society at all times. Questions of any nature on Masonic subjects are earnestly invited 
from our members, particularly those connected with lodges or study clubs which are 
following our Study Club course. The Society is now receiving from fifty to one 
hundred inquiries each week; it is manifestly impossible to publish many of them in 
this Department. 


Has the Greek Orthodox Church pronounced against Freemasonry after the fashion of 
the Roman Catholic Church? This inquiry, which comes to hand with singular 
regularity, has proved (for some reason or other) strangely difficult to answer. If the 
reader chances to be able to supply any information, or to suggest any possible 
sources of information, his assistance will be appreciated. The query was sent to 
Atlantis Greek Daily, of New York. Its manager, L. L. Lontos, submitted an 
interesting reply, here given in full: 

"So far as we know the Greek Orthodox Church is not in favor of secret societies, 
taken as a whole, but has never made any formal pronouncement with reference to 
Freemasonry. We understand that many prominent men of affairs in Greece are 
Freemasons, one of them being the former Premier, Gounaris, one of the ablest men 
of that country, who has been recently executed by the Revolutionary Government, 
now in power in Greece." 


In visiting among lodges in Kentucky I have found the work to be somewhat different 
here and there. Doesn’t the Grand Lodge of Kentucky demand Uniform Work'? 

M.K.T., Kentucky 

Your inquiry was referred to Bro.W.H. McDonald, of Louisville, Kentucky, whose 
reply, written in his rich and friendly vein and with a touch of humor between the 
lines, is here given in full. Brother McDonald is Editor and General Manager of the 
Masonic Howe Journal' published semi-monthly at Louisville for the Craft in 
Kentucky; it is a journal unique in make-up and appeal and always full of the warmth 
of human kindness. 

"The only information that I can give you is that in Kentucky we do not have what 
one would call uniform work. We all do the same work, but in some instances in a 
different manner to that which our neighbor does it. Some of our lodges put the work 
on in elaborate style, fine paraphernalia, fine regalia, clockwork degree teams with a 
lot of feathers and fuss, and maybe at the same time there is another lodge in the State 
that is doing the work, giving the obligations, raising candidates with nothing except 
an apron which glistens with the homemade starch that has been ironed down by the 
hand of some Mason's wife or daughter, under the glow of a kerosene lamp or a few 
candles scattered hither and thither. Yet, with all, the last mentioned gets the idea of 
proving himself worthy of the confidence of his brethren but not in as entertaining a 
manner as the first mentioned. For one hundred and twenty-two years we have been 
going the gait this way. 

"The membership of Kentucky is not permitted to use a cipher ritual, and, as a matter 
of course, it is not permitted to be printed in long primer in any state, or any other 
face type, but as a rule any well posted Mason can go into any lodge and work in any 
degree. Why they can thus perform is next to a miracle. I believe that the work should 
be uniform throughout the state, or as nearly so as could be, yet it costs a deal of 
money to pay the expenses of a lecturer, and as a matter of course, there are few men 
who would accept this place and go out at their own expense, and that too without 

"The matter has been brought to the attention of the Grand Lodge on several 
occasions, and at one time they attempted to have all the work uniformly done in the 
state, but in this they made a flat failure and it has rested there ever since. I do not 
know of any way that the Grand Lodge of Kentucky could be shown the light of this 
matter nor do I know of one who could give you further light on this subject." 


I have a request from up state for information bearing upon Mozart. The brother says 
in his letter that he would like to know more about the work of this great genius. 

G. A. P., South Dakota. 

You will find a complete account of Mozart as a Mason in Ars Quatuor 
(7oronatorum, Vol. XXVI, page 241 if., under the caption "Bro. Mozart and some of 
his Masonic Friends." Beginning on page 245 is a valuable account of his Masonic 

"Mozart arrived at Vienna in 1781, and joined the Craft in 1784. His biographer, Otto 
Jahn, says: 

'The consideration in which the Order was held at Vienna when Mozart settled 
himself there was such that it is not surprising to find him with those who were the 
most clever and best educated men, and the best society of the time. He felt a want of 
that serious amusement which reaches the heart and feelings, and joined the lodge.... 

'The want of a form of liberty based upon intellectual and moral education, which was 
seriously felt at Vienna at this time, was supplied chiefly by Freemasonry, and 
Mozart thought that it would be useful to him to be introduced into a circle of men 
who studied great problems. The mysticism and symbolism of the Craft had its own 
effect upon his impressionable nature.' 

"After he joined the Craft, Freemasonry occupied a very important position in 
Mozart's life. Six months after his own initiation he induced his father to become a 
Mason, and shortly before his father's death he wrote to him as follows: (Mozart had 
at this time been a Mason for about two years.) 

'Since death is the true end and object of life, I have so accustomed myself to this true 
best friend of man, that its image not only has no terrors for me but tranquilizes and 
comforts me. And here I thank God that he has given me the opportunity of knowing 
it as the key of all beatitude.' 

"But nothing more clearly shows how seriously Mozart regarded Masonry than his 
compositions for the lodge. Himself the greatest musician that has ever been a 
member of the Craft, no Masonic music that has ever been written compares with his. 

"The principal Masonic pieces are: 

1. Die Gesellenreise, op. 468, a Masonic song, composed March 26, 1785. 

2. & 3. The Opening and Closing of the Lodge. Op. 483 and 484. These were 
probably composed for the first meeting of the Lodge Neugekronten Hoffnung. 

4. A short cantata, Maurerfreude, op. 471, for tenor and chorus, dated April 20, 1785, 
performed on the 24th of the same month, in honour of Von Born, at a special lodge 
held on that day to celebrate his discovery of the method of working ores by 
amalgamation. The success of this discovery was celebrated by the Lodge Zur wahren 
Eintracht by a banquet, at which the cantata was performed. 

5. A short Masonic cantata, said to have been written by Schikaneder, for two tenors 
and a bass, with orchestral accompaniment, op. 623. This was written for the 
consecration of a Masonic temple, on the 15th November, 1791. It was the last 
finished composition of which Mozart conducted the performance. 

6. The cantate Die ihr des unermesslichen Weltalls Schopfer ehrt, op. 619. 

7. Maurerische Trauermusik, an orchestral piece, an elegy on the death of Duke 
Georg August of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, and Prince Franz Esterhazy, op. 477. 

8. The Magic Flute. 

"In the British Museum there is a manuscript collection of sixty-six Masonic songs in 
German, some of which are ascribed to Mozart. 

"Mozart is stated to have been initiated in the Lodge Zur Wohlletigkeit in the autumn 
of 1784. Other authorities state that he was initiated in the Lodge Zur Hoffnung or the 
Lodge Zur gekronten Hoffnung. As a matter of fact all these statements are in a 
measure true." 


One of the Craft Lodges in this city desires to know if Sir Robert Baden-Powell is a 

C. B. M., Ontario. 

A letter addressed to P. Colville Smith, Grand Secretary, United Grand Lodge of 
England, elicited the reply "so far as I am aware, Sir Robert Baden-Powell is not a 

— o — 



As a member of Kane Council No. 2, Royal and Select Masters of Newark, N. J., may 
I add a word to M. W. Bro. G. W. Baird's autobiography of Dr. Elisha Kent Kane as it 
appears in the March, 1923, issue of THE BUILDER? 

Bro. Baird states that Dr. Kane's name is perpetuated in Masonry by Kane Lodge No. 
252, F. & A. M., of New York, and he apparently gives that body all the credit for 
initiating the movement for the Kane Memorial in Cuba. 

In addition to Kane Lodge of New York we have here in New Jersey Kane Council 
No. 2, R. & S. M., and also Kane Lodge No. 55, F. & A. M. in Newark, both of which 
bodies are named for Dr. Kane: also an Eastern Star Chapter of that name in Newark. 

The Bro. William E. Somers mentioned in the article is a member of Kane Council 
and a zealous student of all matters relating to the life of Dr. Kane. It was due to his 
untiring efforts that the whole matter of the memorial tablet was brought about and 
the expense was borne mainly by the three Kane bodies I have mentioned. 

We members of Kane Council are very proud of our illustrious namesake and I feel 
that the Masonic world should know that we did our share in perpetuating his 

C. N. Millington, New Jersey. 

THE BUILDER has also received a letter from Brother Antonio Urbina, Secretary, 
informing us that a "Kane Lodge," composed principally of Americans, was formed 
at Preston, Oriente, Cuba, last June under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of the 
Island of Cuba. 


On Monday evening, March 26th, 1923, Star of Hope, No. 430, F. & A. M., of the 
State of New York, conferred the Third Degree on six sons of Wm. C. Lutz, Sr., of 
that lodge, by special dispensation from Grand Master Arthur S. Tompkins. It is 
claimed that this is the first time in Masonic history when six blood brothers were 
raised to the Sublime Degree of Master Mason the same evening. 

The Fellowcraft Team of the New York Post Office Square Club who are famous for 
the presentation of their drama, The Temple Tragedy, officiated on this auspicious 

Fourteen hundred brethren crowded the Brooklyn Masonic Temple to witness the 
unique event. 

Richard S. Power, New York. 


I have read with much interest Bro. Haywood's article on Mithraism in THE 
BUILDER for May, and liked it very much. The only thing which I feel inclined to 
add is that I think you might bring out a little more plainly the fact that in Mithraism, 

as in all the Mystery religions, there seems to have been the underlying belief in the 
attainment of immortal life through death. The whole point of most of these Mysteries 
is the belief that the Lord of the Cult was a supernatural being who either had been a 
god who became man or was a man endowed with some supernatural power which 
enabled him to win his way through all kinds of difficulties, usually including a 
painful death, to the goal of immortal and divine happiness. The initiate, who 
reproduced symbolically the experience of the Lord, really shared in the privileges 
which the Lord had obtained. Immortality through death by repeating the experience 
of the Lord is, I think, the formula which most nearly covers all Mystery religions, or, 
as it would perhaps be better to call them, sacramental religions. For, as you know, 
the word mystery is the usual Greek word for sacrament and sacramentum became the 
usual Latin word for mystery. K. Lake, Massachusetts. 

Readers will be interested to know that Bro. Kirsopp Lake, of the Divinity School of 
Harvard University, is Chaplain of The Harvard Lodge, as described by Bro. Guy H. 
Holliday in THE BUILDER for April. Bro. Lake is a man of incredible learning who 
has specialized in the field covered by Mithraism and other Ancient Mysteries. Ye 
Editor has long lived in hope of enticing Professor Lake into the ranks of Masonic 
scholars where his shining gifts and extraordinary attainments would prove of 
inestimable value to the Craft. 


Among the many letters received in response to the editorial, "Expert Wanted! A 
Masonic Consulting Architect," printed in THE BUILDER, March, 1923, page 84, 
here is one of peculiar interest. Brother Osgood is one of the two members of the firm 
of Osgood and Osgood of Grand Rapids, Michigan, consulting architects for the 
George Washington National Memorial, now in process of erection at Alexandria, 

"The subject of Masonic temple design is as basic and scientific as is the designing of 
any other specific type of building, and yet I think it is a fair statement to say that as a 
group there are more existing failures in Masonic temples erected today than in any 
other special class of buildings, such as schools, hospitals, churches, theatres, etc. The 
question that interests us is why is it that this condition exists There are many reasons 
but, for fear of overloading this letter, I will give the one big explanation which can 
be summed up in a few words, namely the employment of architects who have had no 
experience on such work professionally, or from the standpoint of a Masonic 
executive and worker in various bodies. 

"If committees would generally only use the same sound business judgment in 
employing an architect that they do in matters pertaining to their own individual 
business success, this situation would be different. But they generally employ an 
architect not because of his qualifications in, or knowledge of the subject, but because 
he just happens to be an architect and lives in the town where the building is 
contemplated, is a member of the Craft, is 'one of the boys'; and all this, added to the 
fact that the money is to be raised locally, makes it difficult to tell this architect that 
the committee is more responsible to their brother constituents in producing a one 
hundred per cent efficient Masonic working building, than they are in advancing his 
ambitions or desires. Mr. Architect feels hurt if his fellows for one moment even 
suggest his inability to handle the problem, for is he not an architect ? does he not 
belong to the Fraternity ? is he not a citizen and a supporter of the project? Of course 
he is but, as a matter of fact, this Mr. Architect all during his professional career has 
been designing residences, or factories, or banks, or anything else than Masonic 
temples. This home job is his first and in most cases his last Masonic temple, but he 
wants it and moves heaven and earth to stop it from going outside, just to save his 
professional status. He has very little knowledge to start with and when through, he 
has done what the committee has told him to do, and thus has acted in the capacity of 
a draftsman and not as an advisor. 

"Now I am quite sure if these same committees were to have a hospital problem on 
their hands, they would say to themselves 'the thing to do first is to find some 
architect or firm of architects who from training and experience are specialists in 
hospital construction, for we shall be held responsible for the success of our project, 
and those advancing the money have a right to demand the last word in hospital 
arrangement, operation and upkeep.' There is as much logic in thinking that the 
average designer, or worse yet, industrial engineer, can give these results on any 

specialized type of building, as it is to consider the employment of a veterinarian to 
remove a human appendix. They all can make a stab at it, but either the public or the 
patient takes the chances. The question of responsibility is with those who do the 
employing and to me that responsibility is far greater to the constituents represented 
than to an individual or small group. A man who has never designed a Masonic 
temple has to start from the beginning and build up his knowledge and doesn't know 
what it ought to cost or worse still what it will cost. 

"The building of a Masonic temple is a man's job and the right results can be obtained 
provided the same good business principles are used that would make any business a 

"Show me the first architect who is big enough, and is interested enough in the 
Masonic Fraternity (if he has had no experience in this kind of work) to say, Why I 
guess I know as much about the requirements of the problem as any other architect in 
town, but 1 don't think any of us can give the results that you should have. I will be 
pleased to do this work but I advise the employment of a consulting architect to aid 
me, a man who knows this game, and together we will give the results that you have a 
right to expect! Show me such a man, and you have found an architect worthy of a 
place in his profession and of membership in our Fraternity. 

S. Eugene Osgood, Grand Rapids, Michigan. 


I am compiling a list of important buildings here and abroad of which the corner 
stones have been laid by Masons. Brethren who can furnish me with any information 
of this kind will please send direct to me. C. E. Krause, 

338 West Main St., 
Batavia, N.Y. 


The oldest Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons in the present state of Oklahoma is 
Cherokee Lodge, No. 10, originally 21. It was flourishing in 1852 under the 
jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Arkansas. The Cherokee Nation of Indians gave to 
this lodge and to the Sons of Temperance two lots in the town of Talequah, the capital 
of the Cherokee Nation. In 1868 this lodge was discontinued on the rolls of the Grand 
Lodge of Arkansas but with other Indian lodges it continued to work until 1877 when 
it received a new charter under the Grand Lodge of Indian Territory. 

Other lodges are Fort Gibson Lodge No. 36, chartered by Arkansas, November 5, 
1850, dropped from Arkansas 1868, chartered by the Grand Lodge of Indian 
Territory, 1878, as Alpha Lodge, No. 12; and Flint Lodge, No. 74, chartered under 
Arkansas, 1853, dropped 1867, and again chartered as Flint Lodge, No. 11, under 
Indian Territory. 

Many Cherokees and other Indians participated in the inauguration of the Grand 
Lodge of Indian Territory in 1874. Of the Cherokee Indians the following have been 
Most Worshipful Grand Masters of the Grand Lodge of Indian Territory: Harvey 
Lindsey, 1882; Florian Nash, 1885, 1886, 1887; Leo E. Bennett, 1889 to 1892; and 
Wilson O. Burton in 1904. Under the jurisdiction of Oklahoma, after the absorption 
of the Territory, O'Lonzo Conner was Grand Master in 1919. Leo E. Bennett was 
Grand Treasurer from 1899 to 1917. 

These facts are gleaned from the History of the Cherokee Indians, by Emmet Starr, 
(The Warden Co., Oklahoma City, 1921). Arthur C. Parker, New York. 


On Sunday October 1, 1922, the writer preached in the Masonic Temple at Tampico, 
Mexico, and at 6 P. M. on Monday, October 2, constituted Tampico Commandery 
No. 1 Knights Templar and installed its officers, acting under a Dispensation from the 
Grand Master of the Grand Encampment of the United States. At 8 P. M. the hall was 
opened to Freemasons and their friends who listened for an hour to an address on 
Freemasonry. The Tampico Masonic Temple is valued at $125,000, and the Lodge, 
Chapter, and Commandery are prospering. 

From Tampico I went to Mexico City where I gave an hour's address to Auahuac 
Lodge on Thursday evening October 6. Saturday October 7, 1 met with Toltec Lodge 
and took a part in the work of the Third Degree; giving the Lectures and the Charges. 
Toltec Lodge was chartered by the Grand Lodge of Missouri forty years ago. The two 
lodges in the city and the one at Tampico are subordinate to the York Grand Lodge, 
which is composed of eighteen lodges with some nine hundred members. This Grand 
Lodge is recognized by the Grand Lodge of Missouri and there is no good reason why 
any American Grand Lodge should hesitate to recognize it, as it holds to the 
fundamentals of Freemasonry according to our standards. There is another Grand 
Lodge with headquarters in the City of Mexico which we ought not to recognize, as it 
does not require what we regard as essential. 

C. H. Briggs, P. G. M., Missouri. 


Masonry had its beginnings among the men who were builders of things material - the 
homes, temples and cathedrals of the old world. Masonry developed into an 
organization of men striving to build things spiritual, to reconstruct the hearts, minds 
and lives of men, to change their ideals just as the Craft had changed from Operative 
to Speculative Masonry. The time has now come for Masonry to give some thought to 
the building of things physical, to the reconstruction of the broken bodies of men. 

The business man who goes on year after year without an inventory is now 
considered a poor manager. Yet Masonry has never made an inventory of its building 
material - its membership. How many of us die each year of some preventable disease 
? How many are inmates of insane asylums, without hope ? How many of us are out 
of employment? How mane of us are about to fail in business ? These and many other 
questions should be included in our "stock taking," not from idle curiosity, but to get 
facts that may enable the Craft to go to work intelligently, and thereby put into 
practice some of its great and beautiful teachings. 

It has been estimated by the National Tuberculosis Association that there are 42,300 
Masons in the United States suffering from tuberculosis at all times, and that 4,700 of 
them die every year from this disease. Up to the present time, little has been done for 
the relief of these brethren. No matter how wealthy a man may be when tuberculosis 
claims him he can spend all of his fortune seeking health. How about the average man 
whose income stops when he is compelled to stop work? Unless the hand of fraternal 
assistance is extended he will die in poverty and leave a heritage of debt and 
pauperism to his family. 

Help is freely given when a local lodge finds one of the brethren in distress. But the 
average lodge cannot carry a brother for a year or more and spend one or two 
thousand dollars upon each case. Hospitals for such cases are limited and expensive. 
While the charity of the Fraternity is an inexhaustible mine of purest gold, yet it is not 

scientifically worked and through the lack of organization very little has been 
accomplished for the care and cure of consumptive brethren. 

A Commission has been appointed by the Grand Lodges of Texas, New Mexico and 
Arizona to study this subject and to make some recommendations for the 
establishment of a sanatorium for sick brethren. Many hundreds of such cases come 
to the Southwest every year seeking health and many become a charge upon the Blue 
Lodges of this section. The problem has become so serious that united action is 

The members of the Commission will welcome suggestions from readers of THE 
BUILDER of plans for financing the construction and operation of a National 
Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatorium. Send your communications to me. 

R. J. Newton, 2130 River Ave., San Antonio, Texas. 

— o — 


Do you recall the cut of "The Cycle of Cathay" that appeared on page 37 of the 
February issue? It is interesting to know that the Northern Pacific Railroad published 
an exceedingly interesting little booklet on that ancient design called "The Story of 
the Monad." I have a' few copies at hand to give away. 

Several brethren wrote to chastise us for adopting the practice of carrying over the-tail 
ends of articles to the rear pages. The thing was a temporary expedient adopted as a 
part of a plan for transforming the make-up of the magazine. About that more anon. 

* * * 

Have you a Masonic burial ground in your community ?. If so please send us its name 
and location, along with the address of the official in charge. Ever and anon some 
brother writes to make some inquiry about such things. 

* * * 

These are good days for hiking - it is my favorite sport but any kind of weather is 
good for the kind of jaunt described in "Who'll Walk With Me?" 

And who will walk a mile with me 
Along life's weary way? 

A friend whose heart has eyes to see 
The stars shine out o'er the darkening lea, 

And the quiet rest at the end of the day - 
A friend who knows and dares to say 
The brave, sweet words that cheer the way 
When he walks a mile with me. 

With such a comrade, such a friend, 

I fain would walk till journey's end, 
Through summer sunshine, winter rain, 
And then, Farewell! We shall meet again. 

- Henry Van Dyke.